Literature DB >> 26915744

Determining patient preferences in the management of neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a conjoint analysis.

J M Baxter1, A J Fotheringham1, A J E Foss1.   

Abstract

PurposeTo determine the opinions from a patient perspective on relevant variables in the delivery of treatment for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).MethodsPilot interviews with patients and doctors were conducted to identify what variables in the provision of a nAMD service were important. This led to the generation of two sets of scenario options. Subsequently 100 patients undergoing active treatment for nAMD in the National Health Service University Hospital, United Kingdom underwent interview assessment. They were asked to rank their preferences for provision of their care with reference to these two sets of scenario options. Using conjoint analysis, percentage preferences, and utility scores for each variable in each scenario design were calculated.ResultsNinety-five patients completed the preference ranking for both scenarios. Eight patients ranked worse vision as preferable to better vision and were excluded on the basis that they had not understood the task. The results of the remaining 87 patients are presented. The most important factor to patients was having good vision, followed by a one-stop service and less frequent follow up. The least important factors were label status of the drug, cost to the health service, and grade of the injector.ConclusionPatients regard good vision and minimal visits to the hospital above the status of injector, label status of drug, or cost to the NHS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26915744      PMCID: PMC4869131          DOI: 10.1038/eye.2016.18

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eye (Lond)        ISSN: 0950-222X            Impact factor:   3.775


  22 in total

1.  Focus Groups in Elderly Ophthalmologic Patients: Setting the Stage for Quantitative Preference Elicitation.

Authors:  Marion Danner; Vera Vennedey; Mickaël Hiligsmann; Sascha Fauser; Stephanie Stock
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Views of glaucoma patients on aspects of their treatment: an assessment of patient preference by conjoint analysis.

Authors:  Jonathan S Bhargava; Bakula Patel; Alexander J E Foss; Anthony J Avery; Anthony J King
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  Ranibizumab versus verteporfin for neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

Authors:  David M Brown; Peter K Kaiser; Mark Michels; Gisele Soubrane; Jeffrey S Heier; Robert Y Kim; Judy P Sy; Susan Schneider
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2006-10-05       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 4.  How big is the burden of visual loss caused by age related macular degeneration in the United Kingdom?

Authors:  C G Owen; A E Fletcher; M Donoghue; A R Rudnicka
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 4.638

5.  Views of glaucoma patients on provision of follow-up care; an assessment of patient preferences by conjoint analysis.

Authors:  J S Bhargava; A Bhan-Bhargava; A J E Foss; A J King
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 4.638

6.  Views of older people on cataract surgery options: an assessment of preferences by conjoint analysis.

Authors:  M-A Ross; A J Avery; A J E Foss
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2003-02

7.  Ranibizumab versus Bevacizumab for Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration: Results from the GEFAL Noninferiority Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Laurent Kodjikian; Eric H Souied; Gérard Mimoun; Martine Mauget-Faÿsse; Francine Behar-Cohen; Evelyne Decullier; Laure Huot; Gilles Aulagner
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2013-08-02       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  Intravitreal aflibercept (VEGF trap-eye) in wet age-related macular degeneration.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Heier; David M Brown; Victor Chong; Jean-Francois Korobelnik; Peter K Kaiser; Quan Dong Nguyen; Bernd Kirchhof; Allen Ho; Yuichiro Ogura; George D Yancopoulos; Neil Stahl; Robert Vitti; Alyson J Berliner; Yuhwen Soo; Majid Anderesi; Georg Groetzbach; Bernd Sommerauer; Rupert Sandbrink; Christian Simader; Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2012-10-17       Impact factor: 12.079

9.  Transformational change: nurses substituting for ophthalmologists for intravitreal injections - a quality-improvement report.

Authors:  Monica M Michelotti; Salwa Abugreen; Simon P Kelly; Jiten Morarji; Debra Myerscough; Tina Boddie; Ann Haughton; Natalie Nixon; Brenda Mason; Evangelos Sioras
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-04-15

10.  Ranibizumab versus bevacizumab to treat neovascular age-related macular degeneration: one-year findings from the IVAN randomized trial.

Authors:  Usha Chakravarthy; Simon P Harding; Chris A Rogers; Susan M Downes; Andrew J Lotery; Sarah Wordsworth; Barnaby C Reeves
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2012-05-11       Impact factor: 12.079

View more
  9 in total

1.  Patient Preferences Associated with Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapies for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration and Diabetic Macular Edema.

Authors:  Davis Bhagat; Breanne Kirby; Harit Bhatt; Rama Jager; Meena George; Veeral Sheth
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-10-01

2.  How Well Can Analytic Hierarchy Process be Used to Elicit Individual Preferences? Insights from a Survey in Patients Suffering from Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

Authors:  Marion Danner; Vera Vennedey; Mickaël Hiligsmann; Sascha Fauser; Christian Gross; Stephanie Stock
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  Resource Use and Real-World Outcomes for Ranibizumab Treat and Extend for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration in the UK: Interim Results from TERRA.

Authors:  Yit Yang; Louise Downey; Hemal Mehta; Bushra Mushtaq; Niro Narendran; Nishal Patel; Praveen J Patel; Filis Ayan; Kara Gibson; Franklin Igwe; Pete Jeffery
Journal:  Ophthalmol Ther       Date:  2017-05-15

4.  TANDEM TRIAL: a factorial randomised controlled trial of dose and review schedule of bevacizumab (Avastin) for neovascular macular degeneration in the East Midlands.

Authors:  Alexander Foss; Rebecca Haydock; Margaret Childs; Lelia M Duley; Theo Empeslidis; Sushma Dhar-Munshi; Alan A Montgomery; Reuben Ogollah; Mara Ozolins; Paul Tesha; Eleanor Mitchell
Journal:  BMJ Open Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-12-08

5.  Patient and retina specialists' preferences in neovascular age-related macular degeneration treatment. A discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Roberto Gallego-Pinazo; Begoña Pina-Marin; Marta Comellas; Susana Aceituno; Laia Gómez-Baldó; Carles Blanch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-12-31       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Patient Preferences in the Management of Wet Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Conjoint Analysis.

Authors:  Adrian Skelly; Nicholas Taylor; Christina Fasser; Jean-Pierre Malkowski; Pushpendra Goswamy; Louise Downey
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2022-08-22       Impact factor: 4.070

Review 7.  Methods to Assess Patient Preferences in Old Age Pharmacotherapy - A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Annette Eidam; Anja Roth; André Lacroix; Sabine Goisser; Hanna M Seidling; Walter E Haefeli; Jürgen M Bauer
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2020-03-04       Impact factor: 2.711

8.  Patient Preferences for Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Treatment for Wet Age-Related Macular Degeneration in Japan: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Takeshi Joko; Yoshimi Nagai; Ryusaburo Mori; Koji Tanaka; Yuji Oshima; Yusuke Hikichi; Tetsushi Komori; Joao Carrasco; Martine C Maculaitis; Oliver Will; Kathleen Beusterien; Kanji Takahashi
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 2.711

9.  What would an 'ideal' glaucoma examination be like? - A conjoint analysis of patients' and physicians' preferences.

Authors:  Daniel R Muth; Aljoscha S Neubauer; Annemarie Klingenstein; Ulrich Schaller; Siegfried G Priglinger; Christoph W Hirneiß
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-07-26       Impact factor: 2.031

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.