K Steen Carlsson1,2, E Andersson1, E Berntorp3. 1. The Swedish Institute for Health Economics, Lund, Sweden. 2. Department of Clinical Sciences, Malmö, Health Economics Unit, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. 3. Centre for Thrombosis and Haemostasis, Skane University Hospital, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Clinical trials have shown promising results for extended half-life factor VIII concentrates but little is known about individuals' valuation of haemophilia treatment attributes. AIM: To assess patient/caregiver and population valuation of treatment attributes of prophylactic regimens for people with severe haemophilia A. METHODS: Members ≥16 years of the Swedish Haemophilia Society (FBIS) and of a web-panel representative of the Swedish population were invited to participate in a web-survey investigating preferences for haemophilia treatment attributes using the Time Trade-Off methodology which ranks health states on a scale 0 (dead) to 1 (full health). All respondents assessed the same four treatment scenarios for severe haemophilia A, each described by three stylized attributes: injection interval (every 2nd or 5th day); participation in physical activity (Y/N); annual risk of bleed (1-2 or 5-6 bleeds). RESULTS: The survey had 1657 respondents (68% complete responses; 184/1233 from FBIS/web-panel gave informed consent; mean age 52 years, 51% men). Respondents from FBIS and from the web-panel had the same preference ranking of the four treatment scenarios, but members of FBIS consistently rated significantly higher health utilities; range 0.67-0.73 vs 0.54-0.60. Participation in physical activity implied +0.023 (95% confidence interval 0.015-0.030); a longer injection interval implied +0.038 (0.03; 0.45); and fewer bleeds implied +0.022 (0.015-0.029) utility points. CONCLUSIONS: Patient/caregiver and population preferences indicate that treatment attributes such as frequency of injections and the possibility of participating in physical activity are important attributes impacting quality of life in addition to the control and prevention of bleeding episodes.
INTRODUCTION: Clinical trials have shown promising results for extended half-life factor VIII concentrates but little is known about individuals' valuation of haemophilia treatment attributes. AIM: To assess patient/caregiver and population valuation of treatment attributes of prophylactic regimens for people with severe haemophilia A. METHODS: Members ≥16 years of the Swedish Haemophilia Society (FBIS) and of a web-panel representative of the Swedish population were invited to participate in a web-survey investigating preferences for haemophilia treatment attributes using the Time Trade-Off methodology which ranks health states on a scale 0 (dead) to 1 (full health). All respondents assessed the same four treatment scenarios for severe haemophilia A, each described by three stylized attributes: injection interval (every 2nd or 5th day); participation in physical activity (Y/N); annual risk of bleed (1-2 or 5-6 bleeds). RESULTS: The survey had 1657 respondents (68% complete responses; 184/1233 from FBIS/web-panel gave informed consent; mean age 52 years, 51% men). Respondents from FBIS and from the web-panel had the same preference ranking of the four treatment scenarios, but members of FBIS consistently rated significantly higher health utilities; range 0.67-0.73 vs 0.54-0.60. Participation in physical activity implied +0.023 (95% confidence interval 0.015-0.030); a longer injection interval implied +0.038 (0.03; 0.45); and fewer bleeds implied +0.022 (0.015-0.029) utility points. CONCLUSIONS:Patient/caregiver and population preferences indicate that treatment attributes such as frequency of injections and the possibility of participating in physical activity are important attributes impacting quality of life in addition to the control and prevention of bleeding episodes.
Authors: Johannes Oldenburg; Charles R M Hay; Víctor Jiménez-Yuste; Flora Peyvandi; Jean-François Schved; Johan Szamosi; Bent Winding; Stefan Lethagen Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-05-30 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Erna C van Balen; Marjolein L Wesselo; Bridget L Baker; Marjan J Westerman; Michiel Coppens; Cees Smit; Mariëtte H E Driessens; Frank W G Leebeek; Johanna G van der Bom; Samantha C Gouw Journal: Patient Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 3.883
Authors: Jamie O'Hara; Antony P Martin; Diane Nugent; Michelle Witkop; Tyler W Buckner; Mark W Skinner; Brian O'Mahony; Brendan Mulhern; George Morgan; Nanxin Li; Eileen K Sawyer Journal: Haemophilia Date: 2021-02-17 Impact factor: 4.287
Authors: Katarina Steen Carlsson; Bent Winding; Jan Astermark; Fariba Baghaei; Elisabeth Brodin; Eva Funding; Margareta Holmström; Klaus Österholm; Sofia Bergenstråle; Emelie Andersson; Stefan Lethagen Journal: Haemophilia Date: 2022-04-23 Impact factor: 4.263