Patient preferences for eye drop characteristics: A willingness-to-pay analysis

Archives of Ophthalmology

Volumn 121, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 540-546

  Jampel, Henry D ^a,c   Schwartz, Gail F ^a   Robin, Alan L ^a,b   Abrams, Donald A ^a   Johnson, Elizabeth ^b   Miller, Rhonda B ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALPHA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR STIMULATING AGENT; BETA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; CARBONATE DEHYDRATASE INHIBITOR; EYE DROPS; MIOTIC AGENT; PROSTAGLANDIN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; DROWSINESS; FATIGUE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE ABNORMALITY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PATIENT EDUCATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT; RETINA TEAR; SEXUAL DYSFUNCTION; SIDE EFFECT; SYMPTOMATOLOGY; TASTE DISORDER; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT;

AGED; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; BALTIMORE; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG THERAPY; FEMALE; FINANCING, PERSONAL; GLAUCOMA; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; MALE; OPHTHALMIC SOLUTIONS; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; QUALITY OF LIFE; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS;

EID: 0037386752     PISSN: 00039950     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/archopht.121.4.540     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Kass MA, Gordon M, Morley REJ, Meltzer DW, Goldberg JJ. Compliance with topical timolol treatment. Am J Ophthalmol. 1987;103:188-193.
2. Kass MA, Meltzer DW, Gordon M, Cooper D, Goldberg J. Compliance with topical pilocarpine treatment. Am J Ophthalmol. 1986;101:515-523.
3. Patel SC, Spaeth GL. Compliance in patients prescribed eyedrops for glaucoma. Ophthalmic Surg. 1995;26:233-236.
4. Granstrom PA. Progression of visual field defects in glaucoma: relation to compliance with pilocarpine therapy. Arch Ophthalmol. 1985;103:529-531.
5. Gurwitz JH, Glynn RJ, Monane M, et al. Treatment for glaucoma: adherence by the elderly. Am J Public Health. 1993;83:711-716.
6. Konstas AG, Maskaleris G, Gratsonidis S, Sardelli C. Compliance and viewpoint of glaucoma patients in Greece. Eye. 2000;14:752-756.
7. Olsen JA, Smith RD. Theory versus practice: a review of "willingness-to-pay" in health and health care. Health Econ. 2001;10:39-52.
8. Chestnut LG, Keller LR, Lambert WE, Rowe RD. Measuring heart patients' willingness to pay for changes in angina symptoms. Med Decis Making. 1996;16: 65-77.
9. Appel LJ, Steinberg EP, Powe NR, Anderson GF, Dwyer SA, Faden RR. Risk reduction from low osmolality contrast media: what do patients think it is worth? Med Care. 1990;28:324-337.
10. Sorum PC. Measuring patient preferences by willingness to pay to avoid: the case of acute otitis media. Med Decis Making. 1999;19:27-37.
11. Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance GW, Barr R, Horsman J. Guide to Design and Development of Health-State Utility Instrumentation. Hamilton, Ontario: McMaster University; 1990. CHEPA Working Paper Series, Nos. 90-99, 1-141.
12. Duan N, Manning WG Jr, Morris CN, Newhouse JP. A comparison of alternative models for the demand for medical care. J Bus Econ Stat. 2002;1:115-126.
13. Kass MA, Meltzer DW, Gordon M. A miniature compliance monitor for eyedrop medication. Arch Ophthalmol. 1984; 102:1550-1554.