Cargando…

Using qualitative research to facilitate the interpretation of quantitative results from a discrete choice experiment: insights from a survey in elderly ophthalmologic patients

BACKGROUND: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of visual impairment and blindness in industrialized countries. Currently, mainly three treatment options are available, which are all intravitreal injections, but differ with regard to the frequency of injections needed, their...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vennedey, Vera, Danner, Marion, Evers, Silvia MAA, Fauser, Sascha, Stock, Stephanie, Dirksen, Carmen D, Hiligsmann, Mickaël
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4902149/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27350743
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S101584
_version_ 1782436939422498816
author Vennedey, Vera
Danner, Marion
Evers, Silvia MAA
Fauser, Sascha
Stock, Stephanie
Dirksen, Carmen D
Hiligsmann, Mickaël
author_facet Vennedey, Vera
Danner, Marion
Evers, Silvia MAA
Fauser, Sascha
Stock, Stephanie
Dirksen, Carmen D
Hiligsmann, Mickaël
author_sort Vennedey, Vera
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of visual impairment and blindness in industrialized countries. Currently, mainly three treatment options are available, which are all intravitreal injections, but differ with regard to the frequency of injections needed, their approval status, and cost. This study aims to estimate patients’ preferences for characteristics of treatment options for neovascular AMD. METHODS: An interviewer-assisted discrete choice experiment was conducted among patients suffering from AMD treated with intravitreal injections. A Bayesian efficient design was used for the development of 12 choice tasks. In each task patients indicated their preference for one out of two treatment scenarios described by the attributes: side effects, approval status, effect on visual function, injection and monitoring frequency. While answering the choice tasks, patients were asked to think aloud and explain the reasons for choosing or rejecting specific characteristics. Quantitative data were analyzed with a mixed multinomial logit model. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients completed the questionnaire. Patients significantly preferred treatments that improve visual function, are approved, are administered in a pro re nata regimen (as needed), and are accompanied by bimonthly monitoring. Patients significantly disliked less frequent monitoring visits (every 4 months) and explained this was due to fear of deterioration being left unnoticed, and in turn experiencing disease deterioration. Significant preference heterogeneity was found for all levels except for bimonthly monitoring visits and severe, rare eye-related side effects. Patients gave clear explanations of their individual preferences during the interviews. CONCLUSION: Significant preference trends were discernible for the overall sample, despite the preference heterogeneity for most treatment characteristics. Patients like to be monitored and treated regularly, but not too frequently or infrequently. The results of our qualitative research facilitated the interpretation of the quantitative data collected in this study.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4902149
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49021492016-06-27 Using qualitative research to facilitate the interpretation of quantitative results from a discrete choice experiment: insights from a survey in elderly ophthalmologic patients Vennedey, Vera Danner, Marion Evers, Silvia MAA Fauser, Sascha Stock, Stephanie Dirksen, Carmen D Hiligsmann, Mickaël Patient Prefer Adherence Original Research BACKGROUND: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of visual impairment and blindness in industrialized countries. Currently, mainly three treatment options are available, which are all intravitreal injections, but differ with regard to the frequency of injections needed, their approval status, and cost. This study aims to estimate patients’ preferences for characteristics of treatment options for neovascular AMD. METHODS: An interviewer-assisted discrete choice experiment was conducted among patients suffering from AMD treated with intravitreal injections. A Bayesian efficient design was used for the development of 12 choice tasks. In each task patients indicated their preference for one out of two treatment scenarios described by the attributes: side effects, approval status, effect on visual function, injection and monitoring frequency. While answering the choice tasks, patients were asked to think aloud and explain the reasons for choosing or rejecting specific characteristics. Quantitative data were analyzed with a mixed multinomial logit model. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients completed the questionnaire. Patients significantly preferred treatments that improve visual function, are approved, are administered in a pro re nata regimen (as needed), and are accompanied by bimonthly monitoring. Patients significantly disliked less frequent monitoring visits (every 4 months) and explained this was due to fear of deterioration being left unnoticed, and in turn experiencing disease deterioration. Significant preference heterogeneity was found for all levels except for bimonthly monitoring visits and severe, rare eye-related side effects. Patients gave clear explanations of their individual preferences during the interviews. CONCLUSION: Significant preference trends were discernible for the overall sample, despite the preference heterogeneity for most treatment characteristics. Patients like to be monitored and treated regularly, but not too frequently or infrequently. The results of our qualitative research facilitated the interpretation of the quantitative data collected in this study. Dove Medical Press 2016-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4902149/ /pubmed/27350743 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S101584 Text en © 2016 Vennedey et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Vennedey, Vera
Danner, Marion
Evers, Silvia MAA
Fauser, Sascha
Stock, Stephanie
Dirksen, Carmen D
Hiligsmann, Mickaël
Using qualitative research to facilitate the interpretation of quantitative results from a discrete choice experiment: insights from a survey in elderly ophthalmologic patients
title Using qualitative research to facilitate the interpretation of quantitative results from a discrete choice experiment: insights from a survey in elderly ophthalmologic patients
title_full Using qualitative research to facilitate the interpretation of quantitative results from a discrete choice experiment: insights from a survey in elderly ophthalmologic patients
title_fullStr Using qualitative research to facilitate the interpretation of quantitative results from a discrete choice experiment: insights from a survey in elderly ophthalmologic patients
title_full_unstemmed Using qualitative research to facilitate the interpretation of quantitative results from a discrete choice experiment: insights from a survey in elderly ophthalmologic patients
title_short Using qualitative research to facilitate the interpretation of quantitative results from a discrete choice experiment: insights from a survey in elderly ophthalmologic patients
title_sort using qualitative research to facilitate the interpretation of quantitative results from a discrete choice experiment: insights from a survey in elderly ophthalmologic patients
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4902149/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27350743
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S101584
work_keys_str_mv AT vennedeyvera usingqualitativeresearchtofacilitatetheinterpretationofquantitativeresultsfromadiscretechoiceexperimentinsightsfromasurveyinelderlyophthalmologicpatients
AT dannermarion usingqualitativeresearchtofacilitatetheinterpretationofquantitativeresultsfromadiscretechoiceexperimentinsightsfromasurveyinelderlyophthalmologicpatients
AT everssilviamaa usingqualitativeresearchtofacilitatetheinterpretationofquantitativeresultsfromadiscretechoiceexperimentinsightsfromasurveyinelderlyophthalmologicpatients
AT fausersascha usingqualitativeresearchtofacilitatetheinterpretationofquantitativeresultsfromadiscretechoiceexperimentinsightsfromasurveyinelderlyophthalmologicpatients
AT stockstephanie usingqualitativeresearchtofacilitatetheinterpretationofquantitativeresultsfromadiscretechoiceexperimentinsightsfromasurveyinelderlyophthalmologicpatients
AT dirksencarmend usingqualitativeresearchtofacilitatetheinterpretationofquantitativeresultsfromadiscretechoiceexperimentinsightsfromasurveyinelderlyophthalmologicpatients
AT hiligsmannmickael usingqualitativeresearchtofacilitatetheinterpretationofquantitativeresultsfromadiscretechoiceexperimentinsightsfromasurveyinelderlyophthalmologicpatients