The role of patients' age on their preferences for choosing additional blood pressure-lowering drugs: A discrete choice experiment in patients with diabetes

PLoS ONE

Volumn 10, Issue 10, 2015, Pages

  De Vries, Sieta T ^a   De Vries, Folgerdiena M ^a   Dekker, Thijs ^b   Haaijer Ruskamp, Flora M ^a   De Zeeuw, Dick ^a   Ranchor, Adelita V ^a   Denig, Petra ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

2,4 THIAZOLIDINEDIONE DERIVATIVE; ANGIOTENSIN RECEPTOR ANTAGONIST; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENT; BETA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; CALCIUM CHANNEL BLOCKING AGENT; DIPEPTIDYL PEPTIDASE IV INHIBITOR; DIURETIC AGENT; INSULIN; LIRAGLUTIDE; METFORMIN; ORAL ANTIDIABETIC AGENT; RENIN INHIBITOR; SULFONAMIDE;

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; BLOOD PRESSURE REGULATION; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DRUG CHOICE; FATIGUE; FEMALE; HEART INFARCTION; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEMORY DISORDER; MORTALITY; NON INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PRESCRIPTION; QUESTIONNAIRE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SPEECH DISORDER; UNSPECIFIED SIDE EFFECT; WALKING DIFFICULTY; BLOOD PRESSURE; COMPLICATION; DECISION MAKING; DRUG EFFECTS; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICAL MODEL; STROKE; VERY ELDERLY;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; BLOOD PRESSURE; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DIABETES MELLITUS, TYPE 2; FEMALE; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; RISK FACTORS; STROKE; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84948656100     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0139755     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Aristides M, Weston AR, FitzGerald P, Le Reun C, Maniadakis N. Patient preference and willingnessto-pay for Humalog Mix25 relative to Humulin 30/70: a multicountry application of a discrete choice experiment. Value Health 2004; 7(4):442-454. PMID: 15449636
2. Vermeire E, Hearnshaw H, Van Royen P, Denekens J. Patient adherence to treatment: three decades of research. A comprehensive review. J Clin Pharm Ther 2001; 26(5):331-342. PMID: 11679023
3. Mitchell AJ, Selmes T. Why don't patients take their medicine Reasons and solutions in psychiatry. Adv Psychiatr Treat 2007; 13(5):336-346.
4. Gascon JJ, Sanchez-Ortuno M, Llor B, Skidmore D, Saturno PJ, Treatment Compliance in Hypertension Study Group. Why hypertensive patients do not comply with the treatment: results from a qualitative study. Fam Pract 2004; 21(2):125-130. PMID: 15020377
5. Benson J, Britten N. Patients' decisions about whether or not to take antihypertensive drugs: qualitative study. BMJ 2002; 325(7369):873. PMID: 12386041
6. Svensson S, Kjellgren KI, Ahlner J, Saljo R. Reasons for adherence with antihypertensive medication. Int J Cardiol 2000; 76(2-3):157-163. PMID: 11104870
7. Fried TR, Tinetti ME, Towle V, O'Leary JR, Iannone L. Effects of benefits and harms on older persons' willingness to take medication for primary cardiovascular prevention. Arch Intern Med 2011; 171 (10):923-928. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.32 PMID: 21357797
8. Porzsolt F, Clouth J, Deutschmann M, Hippler HJ. Preferences of diabetes patients and physicians: a feasibility study to identify the key indicators for appraisal of health care values. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2010; 8:125. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-8-125 PMID: 21050469
9. Hauber AB, Mohamed AF, Johnson FR, Falvey H. Treatment preferences and medication adherence of people with Type 2 diabetes using oral glucose-lowering agents. Diabet Med 2009; 26(4):416-424. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2009.02696.x PMID: 19388973
10. Polster M, Zanutto E, McDonald S, Conner C, Hammer M. A comparison of preferences for two GLP-1 products-liraglutide and exenatide-for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. J Med Econ 2010; 13 (4):655-661. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2010.529377 PMID: 21034377
11. Hiligsmann M, van Durme C, Geusens P, Dellaert BG, Dirksen CD, van der Weijden T, et al. Nominal group technique to select attributes for discrete choice experiments: an example for drug treatment choice in osteoporosis. Patient Prefer Adherence 2013; 7:133-139. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S38408 PMID: 23412964
12. Fried TR, Van Ness PH, Byers AL, Towle VR, O'Leary JR, Dubin JA. Changes in preferences for lifesustaining treatment among older persons with advanced illness. J Gen Intern Med 2007; 22(4):495-501. PMID: 17372799
13. Tsevat J, Dawson NV, Wu AW, Lynn J, Soukup JR, Cook EF, et al. Health values of hospitalized patients 80 years or older. HELP Investigators. Hospitalized Elderly Longitudinal Project. JAMA 1998; 279(5):371-375. PMID: 9459470
14. Sherbourne CD, Keeler E, Unutzer J, Lenert L, Wells KB. Relationship between age and patients' current health state preferences. Gerontologist 1999; 39(3):271-278. PMID: 10396885
15. Chin MH, Drum ML, Jin L, Shook ME, Huang ES, Meltzer DO. Variation in treatment preferences and care goals among older patients with diabetes and their physicians. Med Care 2008; 46(3):275-286. PMID: 18388842
16. Dibonaventura MD, Wagner JS, Girman CJ, Brodovicz K, Zhang Q, Qiu Y, et al. Multinational Internetbased survey of patient preference for newer oral or injectable Type 2 diabetes medication. Patient Prefer Adherence 2010; 4:397-406. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S14477 PMID: 21206515
17. Zanchetti A, Ruilope LM. Antihypertensive treatment in patients with type-2 diabetes mellitus: what guidance from recent controlled randomized trials? J Hypertens 2002; 20(11):2099-2110. PMID: 12409940
18. van Hateren KJ, Landman GW, Kleefstra N, Houweling ST, van der Meer K, Bilo HJ. Time for considering other blood pressure target values in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes? Int J Clin Pract 2012; 66 (2):125-127. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2011.02841.x PMID: 22257037
19. Stack RJ, Bundy C, Elliott RA, New JP, Gibson JM, Noyce PR. Patient perceptions of treatment and illness when prescribed multiple medicines for co-morbid type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes 2011; 4:127-135. doi: 10.2147/DMSO.S17444 PMID: 21779144
20. Chan DC, Chen JH, Kuo HK, We CJ, Lu IS, Chiu LS, et al. Drug-related problems (DRPs) identified from geriatric medication safety review clinics. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2012; 54(1):168-174. doi: 10. 1016/j.archger.2011.02.005 PMID: 21353318
21. Leendertse AJ, Egberts AC, Stoker LJ, van den Bemt PM, HARM Study Group. Frequency of and risk factors for preventable medication-related hospital admissions in the Netherlands. Arch Intern Med 2008; 168(17):1890-1896. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2008.3 PMID: 18809816
22. de Vries ST, Keers JC, Visser R, de Zeeuw D, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, Voorham J, et al. Medication beliefs, treatment complexity, and non-Adherence to different drug classes in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Psychosom Res 2014; 76(2):134-138. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2013.11.003 PMID: 24439689
23. Lancsar E, Louviere J. Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user's guide. Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26(8):661-677. PMID: 18620460
24. de Bekker-Grob EW, Ryan M, Gerard K. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Health Econ 2012; 21(2):145-172. doi: 10.1002/hec.1697 PMID: 22223558
25. Ryan M. Discrete choice experiments in health care. BMJ 2004; 328(7436):360-361. PMID: 14962852
26. Reed Johnson F, Lancsar E, Marshall D, Kilambi V, Muhlbacher A, Regier DA, et al. Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health 2013; 16(1):3-13. doi: 10.1016/j. jval.2012.08.2223 PMID: 23337210
27. Cantril H. The pattern of human concerns. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press 1965.
28. Kellett N, West F, Finlay AY. Conjoint analysis: a novel, rigorous tool for determining patient preferences for topical antibiotic treatment for acne. A randomised controlled trial. Br J Dermatol 2006; 154 (3):524-532. PMID: 16445786
29. Herbild L, Bech M, Gyrd-Hansen D. Estimating the Danish populations' preferences for pharmacogenetic testing using a discrete choice experiment. The case of treating depression. Value Health 2009; 12(4):560-567. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00465.x PMID: 18980634
30. Darba J, Restovic G, Kaskens L, Balbona MA, Carbonell A, Cavero P, et al. Patient preferences for osteoporosis in Spain: a discrete choice experiment. Osteoporos Int 2011; 22(6):1947-1954. doi: 10. 1007/s00198-010-1382-3 PMID: 20838770
31. Shafey M, Lupichuk SM, Do T, Owen C, Stewart DA. Preferences of patients and physicians concerning treatment options for relapsed follicular lymphoma: a discrete choice experiment. Bone Marrow Transplant 2011; 46(7):962-969. doi: 10.1038/bmt.2010.225 PMID: 20935681
32. Brown TM, Pashos CL, Joshi AV, Lee WC. The perspective of patients with haemophilia with inhibitors and their care givers: preferences for treatment characteristics. Haemophilia 2011; 17(3):476-482. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2516.2010.02401.x PMID: 21091851
33. Scalone L, Watson V, Ryan M, Kotsopoulos N, Patel R. Evaluation of patients' preferences for genital herpes treatment. Sex Transm Dis 2011; 38(9):802-807. PMID: 21844733
34. Kauf TL, Mohamed AF, Hauber AB, Fetzer D, Ahmad A. Patients' willingness to accept the risks and benefits of new treatments for chronic hepatitis C virus infection. Patient 2012; 5(4):265-278. PMID: 22775534
35. Dwight Johnson M, Apesoa-Varano C, Hay J, Unutzer J, Hinton L. Depression treatment preferences of older white and Mexican origin men. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2013; 35(1):59-65. doi: 10.1016/j. genhosppsych.2012.08.003 PMID: 23141027
36. Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes: UKPDS UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. BMJ 1998; 317(7160):703-713. PMID: 9732337
37. Carter BL, Chrischilles EA, Rosenthal G, et al. Efficacy and safety of nighttime dosing of antihypertensives: review of the literature and design of a pragmatic clinical trial. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2014; 16(2):115-121.
38. Lewanczuk R, Tobe SW. More medications, fewer pills: combination medications for the treatment of hypertension. Can J Cardiol 2007; 23(7):573-576. PMID: 17534465
39. Proeftuin farmacie Groningen. K86, K87, Hypertensie [online]. http://proeftuinfarmaciegroningen. tmade.nl/qmfiles/Hypertensie.pdf. Accessed May 13, 2015.
40. van Hateren KJ, Drion I, Kleefstra N, Groenier KH, Houweling ST, van der Meer K, et al. A prospective observational study of quality of diabetes care in a shared care setting: trends and age differences (ZODIAC-19). BMJ Open 2012; 2(4):e001387. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001387 PMID: 22936821
41. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek [Central Bureau for Statistics]. Sterfte; kerncijfers naar diverse kenmerken [Mortality; highlights to various characteristics]. Den Haag/Heerlen 19-9-2014.
42. Kimman ML, Dellaert BG, Boersma LJ, Lambin P, Dirksen CD. Follow-up after treatment for breast cancer: one strategy fits all? An investigation of patient preferences using a discrete choice experiment. Acta Oncol 2010; 49(3):328-337. doi: 10.3109/02841860903536002 PMID: 20148645
43. Levinson W, Kao A, Kuby A, Thisted RA. Not all patients want to participate in decision making. A national study of public preferences. J Gen Intern Med 2005; 20(6):531-535. PMID: 15987329
44. NICE National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Hypertension. Clinical management of primary hypertension in adults [online]. http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg127/resources/guidancehypertension-pdf. Accessed May 13, 2015.
45. Verenso. Multidisciplinaire Richtlijn Diabetes. Verantwoorde Diabeteszorg bij Kwetsbare Ouderen Thuis en in Verzorgings of Verpleeghuizen. Deel 1. [Multidisciplinary Guideline Diabetes. Responsible Diabetes Care in Vulnerable Elderly at Home and in Residential Care or Nursing Homes. Part 1]. Utrecht, the Netherlands, Verenso, 2011.
46. Steel N. Thresholds for taking antihypertensive drugs in different professional and lay groups: questionnaire survey. BMJ 2000; 320(7247):1446-1447. PMID: 10827049
47. Sarkisian CA, Hays RD, Mangione CM. Do older adults expect to age successfully? The association between expectations regarding aging and beliefs regarding healthcare seeking among older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 2002; 50(11):1837-1843. PMID: 12410903
48. Fried TR, Tinetti M, Agostini J, Iannone L, Towle V. Health outcome prioritization to elicit preferences of older persons with multiple health conditions. Patient Educ Couns 2011; 83(2):278-282. doi: 10.1016/j. pec.2010.04.032 PMID: 20570078
49. Fried TR, Tinetti ME, Iannone L, O'Leary JR, Towle V, Van Ness PH. Health outcome prioritization as a tool for decision making among older persons with multiple chronic conditions. Arch Intern Med 2011; 171(20):1854-1856. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.424 PMID: 21949032
50. Hauber AB, Han S, Yang JC, Gantz I, Tunceli K, Gonzalez JM, et al. Effect of pill burden on dosing preferences, willingness to pay, and likely adherence among patients with type 2 diabetes. Patient Prefer Adherence 2013; 7:937-949. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S43465 PMID: 24086104
51. Viney R, Lancsar E, Louviere J. Discrete choice experiments to measure consumer preferences for health and healthcare. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2002; 2(4):319-326. doi: 10.1586/14737167.2.4.319 PMID: 19807438
52. Hoyos D. The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments. Ecol Econ 2010; 69(8):1595-1603.
53. Milte R, Ratcliffe J, Chen G, Lancsar E, Miller M, Crotty M. Cognitive overload? An exploration of the potential impact of cognitive functioning in discrete choice experiments with older people in health care. Value Health 2014; 17(5):655-659. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.05.005 PMID: 25128060
54. Laba TL. Using Discrete Choice Experiment to elicit patient preferences for osteoporosis drug treatments: where to from here Arthritis Res Ther 2014; 16(2):106. PMID: 25167089
55. Hauber AB, Arellano J, Qian Y, Gonzalez JM, Posner JD, Mohamed AF, et al. Patient preferences for treatments to delay bone metastases. Prostate 2014; 74(15):1488-1497. doi: 10.1002/pros.22865 PMID: 25132622
56. Ryan M, Watson V, Entwistle V. Rationalising the 'irrational': a think aloud study of discrete choice experiment responses. Health Econ 2009; 18(3):321-336. doi: 10.1002/hec.1369 PMID: 18651601