Patient and parent preferences for immunoglobulin treatments: A conjoint analysis

Journal of Medical Economics

Volumn 15, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 1183-1191

  Mohamed, Ateesha F ^a   Kilambi, Vikram ^a   Luo, Michelle P ^b   Iyer, Ravi G ^b   Li Mcleod, Josephine M ^b  

^a RTI HEALTH SOLUTIONS   (United States)

^b BAXTER HEALTHCARE CORPORATION   (United States)

Author keywords

Choice format conjoint analysis; Immunoglobulin treatment; Parent preferences; Patient preferences

Indexed keywords

IMMUNOGLOBULIN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; DRUG SELF ADMINISTRATION; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; IMMUNE DEFICIENCY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PARENTAL ATTITUDE; PATIENT PREFERENCE; SELF REPORT; TREATMENT DURATION;

ADULT; AGED; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DRUG ADMINISTRATION ROUTES; DRUG ADMINISTRATION SCHEDULE; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMMUNOGLOBULINS; IMMUNOLOGIC DEFICIENCY SYNDROMES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PARENTS; PATIENT PREFERENCE; SELF ADMINISTRATION; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84869813709     PISSN: 13696998     EISSN: 1941837X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3111/13696998.2012.716804     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Boyle JM, Buckley RH. Population prevalence of diagnosed primary immunodeficiency disease in the United States. J Clin Immunol 2007;27:497-502
2. Immune Deficiency Foundation (IDF). Diagnostic & clinical care guidelines for primary immunodeficiency diseases. 2009. http://primaryimmune. org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/IDF-Diagnostic-Clinical-Care-Guidelines-for- Primary-Immunodeficiency-Diseases-2nd-Edition.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2012
3. Lindegren ML, Kobrynski L, Rasmussen SA, et al. Applying public health strategies to primary immunodeficiency diseases: a potential approach to genetic disorders. MMWR Recomm Rep 2004;53:1-29
4. Bonilla FA, Bernstein IL, Khan DA, et al. Practice parameters for the diagnosis and management of primary immunodeficiency. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2005;94:s1-s61
5. Savides C, Shaker M. More than just infections: an update on primary immune deficiencies. Curr Opin Pediatr 2010;22:647-54
6. Orange JS, Hossny EM, Weiler CR, et al. Use of intravenous immunoglobulin in human disease: a review of evidence by members of the Primary Immunodeficiency Committee of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2006;117(4 Suppl):S525-53
7. Siegel J. The product: all intravenous immunoglobulins are not equivalent. Pharmacotherapy 2005;25:78S-84S
8. Gelfand EW. Differences between IGIV products: impact on clinical outcome. Int Immunopharmacol 2006;6:592-9
9. Bonilla FA. IgG replacement therapy, no size fits all. J Clin Immunol 2011;2:107-9
10. Fasth A, Nyström J. Quality of life and health-care resource utilization among children with primary immunodeficiency receiving home treatment with subcutaneous human immunoglobulin. J Clin Immunol 2008;28:370-8
11. Crawford B, Dalal AA, Stanford R, et al. Validation of the Experience with Allergic Rhinitis Nasal Spray Questionnaire (EARNS-Q): a patient reported outcomes (PRO) questionnaire to measure experience and preference with nasal sprays. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2008;121(2 Suppl 1):S106
12. Bridges J, Jones C. Patient based health technology assessment: a vision of what might one day be possible. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2007;23:30-5
13. Bridges JFP, Kinter ET, Kidane L, et al. Things are looking up since we started listening to patients: trends in the application of conjoint analysis in health 1982-2007. Patient 2008;1:273-82
14. Mohamed AF, Epstein JD, Li-McLeod JM. Patient and parent preferences for haemophilia A treatments. Haemophilia 2011;17:209-14
15. Mohamed AF, Hauber AB, Neary MP. Patient benefit-risk preferences for targeted agents in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma. Pharmacoeconomics 2011;29:977-88
16. Johnson FR, Özdemir S, Mansfield C, et al. Crohn's disease patients' riskbenefit preferences: serious adverse event risks versus treatment efficacy. Gastroenterology 2007;133:769-77
17. Johnson FR, Hauber AB,Özdemir S, et al. Are gastroenterologists less tolerant of treatment risks than patients? Benefit-risk preferences in Crohn's disease management. J Manag Care Pharm 2010;16:616-28
18. Hauber AB, Mohamed AF, Johnson FR, et al. Quantifying asthma patient preferences for onset of effect of combination inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta2-agonist maintenance medications. Allergy Asthma Proc 2009;30:139-47
19. Hauber AB, Mohamed AF, Watson ME, et al. Benefits, risks, and uncertainty: preferences of antiretroviral-naïve African Americans for HIV treatments. AIDS Patient Care STDs 2009;23:29-34
20. Bridges JFP, Hauber AB, Marshall D, et al. Conjoint analysis applications in health - a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health 2011;14:403-11
21. Kuhfeld W. Marketing research methods in SAS: experimental design, choice, conjoint, and graphical techniques. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc, 2010
22. Kuhfeld W, Tobias F, Garratt M. Efficient experimental design with marketing research applications. J Mark Res 1994;31:545-57
23. Train K. Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge: CUP, 2003. p 138-54
24. Train K, Sonnier G. Mixed logit with bounded distributions of correlated partworths. In: Scarpa R, Alberini A, ed. Applications of simulation methods in environmental and resource economics. Dordrecht: Springer Publisher, 2005. p 117-34
25. Hensher DA, Rose JM, Greene WH. Applied choice analysis. Cambridge: CUP, 2005
26. Louviere JJ, Hensher DA, Rose JM, et al. Stated choice methods: analysis and applications. Cambridge: CUP, 2000
27. Bech M, Gyrd-Hansen D. Effects coding in discrete choice experiments. Health Econ 2005;14:1079-83
28. American Pharmacists Association/APhA. Medication Compliance-Adherence Persistence (CAP) Digest. Washington, DC: American Pharmacists Association and Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, 2003. www.nhtsa.gov/people/ injury/olddrive/druguse. Accessed March 29, 2012
29. Balkrishnan R, Rajagopalan R, Camacho FT, et al. Predictors of medication adherence and associated health care costs in an older population with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a longitudinal cohort study. Clin Ther 2003;25:2958-71
30. Dragomir A, Cote R, Roy L, et al. Impact of adherence to antihypertensive agents on clinical outcomes and hospitalization costs. Med Care 2010;48:418-25
31. Gwadry-Sridhar FH, Manias E, Zhang Y, et al. A framework for planning and critiquing medication compliance and persistence research using prospective study designs. Clin Ther 2009;31:421-35
32. Lau DT, Nau DP. Oral antihyperglycemic medication nonadherence and subsequent hospitalization among individuals with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2004;27:2149-53
33. Sokol MC, McGuigan KA, Verbrugge RR, et al. Impact of medication adherence on hospitalization risk and healthcare cost. Med Care 2005;43:521-30
34. Sheth K, Derebery J, Mahr T, et al. Ineffective control of allergic rhinitis symptoms reduces patient satisfaction and adherence with treatment. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2008;121:S106
35. Kittner, J, Grimbacher B, Wulff W, et al. Patients' attitude to subcutaneous immunoglobulin substitution as home therapy. J Clin Immunol 2006;26:400-5