Literature DB >> 19347988

Patients', physicians', and pharmacists' preferences towards coagulation factor concentrates to treat haemophilia with inhibitors: results from the COHIBA Study.

L Scalone1, L G Mantovani, F Borghetti, S Von Mackensen, A Gringeri.   

Abstract

Despite modern highly efficacious technologies, there is still a lack of consensus on how to optimally treat haemophilia patients with inhibitors. The aim of the study was to evaluate preferences towards the characteristics of different coagulation factor concentrates for haemophilia inhibitors patients, from the perspective of patients or their caregivers, haematologists and pharmacists. A discrete choice study was conducted. Potential products were described with eight selected characteristics: perceived viral safety, risk of anamnestic response, possibility of undergoing major surgery, frequency of infusions in prophylaxis, number of infusions to stop bleeding, time to stop bleeding, time to pain recovery and cost. Participants received 16 pairs of potential products and chose from each pair the option they considered better. Data were analysed with a random-effects conditional logistic model. Totally 1614 observations were obtained from 37 patients/caregivers, 39 physicians and 25 pharmacists from Italy. Cost was the most important characteristic to every group. For patients/caregivers, the next most important factors were: risk of anamnestic response, possibility of undergoing major surgery and perceived viral safety. For physicians, the next most important characteristics were: risk of anamnestic response, number of infusions to stop bleeding and possibility of undergoing major surgery. For pharmacists, the next most important factors were: time to stop bleeding, time to pain recovery and possibility of undergoing major surgery. Decisions on treatments must take into account patients clinical needs; however, preferences can also play an important role in the choice and success of treatments. The results of this study could, therefore, help decision-makers to optimize the overall benefits of treatments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19347988     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2516.2008.01926.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Haemophilia        ISSN: 1351-8216            Impact factor:   4.287


  8 in total

Review 1.  Discrete choice experiments of pharmacy services: a systematic review.

Authors:  Caroline Vass; Ewan Gray; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2016-06

Review 2.  Risk as an attribute in discrete choice experiments: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Mark Harrison; Dan Rigby; Caroline Vass; Terry Flynn; Jordan Louviere; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 3.  Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Michael D Clark; Domino Determann; Stavros Petrou; Domenico Moro; Esther W de Bekker-Grob
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  The role of patient and healthcare professionals in the era of new hemophilia treatments in developed and developing countries.

Authors:  Fadi Nossair; Courtney D Thornburg
Journal:  Ther Adv Hematol       Date:  2018-07-02

5.  Patients', physicians', nurses', and pharmacists' preferences on the characteristics of biologic agents used in the treatment of rheumatic diseases.

Authors:  Luciana Scalone; Piercarlo Sarzi-Puttini; Luigi Sinigaglia; Carlomaurizio Montecucco; Roberto Giacomelli; Giovanni Lapadula; Ignazio Olivieri; Angela Maria Giardino; Paolo Angelo Cortesi; Lorenzo Giovanni Mantovani; Monica Mecchia
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2018-10-16       Impact factor: 2.711

6.  Examining patient and professional perspectives in the UK for gene therapy in haemophilia.

Authors:  Ione Woollacott; George Morgan; Pratima Chowdary; Jamie O'Hara; Bethany Franks; Eline van Overbeeke; Nicola Dunn; Sissel Michelsen; Isabelle Huys; Antony Martin; Matthew Cawson; Jack Brownrigg; Ian Winburn; Jim Thomson
Journal:  Haemophilia       Date:  2022-04-19       Impact factor: 4.263

7.  Patient and parent preferences for characteristics of prophylactic treatment in hemophilia.

Authors:  Roberto Furlan; Sangeeta Krishnan; Jeffrey Vietri
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 2.711

Review 8.  Do patients and health care providers have discordant preferences about which aspects of treatments matter most? Evidence from a systematic review of discrete choice experiments.

Authors:  Mark Harrison; Katherine Milbers; Marie Hudson; Nick Bansback
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-05-17       Impact factor: 2.692

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.