Elicitation of Ostomy Pouch Preferences

Bonnichsen, Ole

doi:10.2165/11586430-000000000-00000

“…An SQ alternative should therefore be included to provide a real-life baseline. 19 Of 348 respondents, 282 (81%) opted for “my current treatment” in at least 1 of the choice situations, which means that some of the alternatives presented to the respondents were regarded as inferior compared with respondents’ current treatment. We noted that respondents tended to choose their current treatment more frequently when both alternatives, A and B, comprised tablets (58%) than when at least 1 of the alternatives comprised the oral film (38%).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This SQ alternative should be represented by attribute levels that most closely describe the respondents’ current treatment, provided that the SQ can vary for respondents. 19,20 …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment Preferences for Acute Allergic Reactions: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Löfvendahl,

Andersson,

Olofsson

et al. 2024

Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Timely treatment of acute allergic reactions (AARs) is important to minimize reaction severity. Corticosteroid tablets dissolved in water are commonly used in mainstay treatment. A new oral film that dissolves on the tongue provides a faster and less cumbersome alternative to tablets for corticosteroid administration during AARs. This study evaluated patients’ preferences for attributes related to administration mode of corticosteroids in AARs. Methods: A web-based survey was sent to a sample from the adult Swedish population (≥18 years) with experience of corticosteroid treatment for AAR. We assessed the willingness to pay (WTP) for attributes related to corticosteroid treatment by applying a discrete choice experiment (DCE) approach. DCE attributes were administration mode, time to symptom relief, and price. The WTP for each attribute was derived using the attribute’s coefficient in a logistic regression analysis. We specified a forced choice (FC) and an unforced choice (UC) model. In the FC model, the respondents chose between 2 hypothetical treatments and in the UC model, between any of 2 hypothetical treatments and their current treatment. Results: The final study population included 348 subjects, of which 80% were women. All the evaluated DCE attributes were significant predictors for the treatment choice (p<.001). In the FC model, the incremental WTP for an oral film compared with tablets was 409 Swedish kronor (SEK [≈€36.7]), with no other factors considered. In the UC model, the incremental WTP for the oral film compared with tablets was 574 SEK (≈€51.7). After considering the value of the respondents’ current treatment, the WTP for the oral film decreased to 336 SEK (≈€30.3). The total WTP was reduced by 17 SEK (≈€1.5) per minute of shorter time to symptom relief. Subgroup analyses showed that people with circulatory symptoms and experience of swallowing difficulties related to allergy medication had higher WTP for the oral film than the average respondent. Conclusion: The findings show a substantial economic benefit of the oral film vs tablets for patients with AARs in Sweden. This result remained also after compensation for the full value of the patients’ current treatment.

show abstract

“…An SQ alternative should therefore be included to provide a real-life baseline. 19 Of 348 respondents, 282 (81%) opted for "my current treatment" in at least 1 of the choice situations, which means that some of the alternatives presented to the respondents were regarded as inferior compared with respondents' current treatment. We noted that respondents tended to choose their current treatment more frequently when both alternatives, A and B, comprised tablets (58%) than when at least 1 of the alternatives comprised the oral film (38%).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This SQ alternative should be represented by attribute levels that most closely describe the respondents' current treatment, provided that the SQ can vary for respondents. 19,20 "Protest" respondents: A "protester" is a respondent who does not make the required trade-offs when making their choices, and the expressed choices do not genuinely reflect their true preferences and values. 21 Protest respondents in our study were classified as (1) those who prefer A or B but at the same time expressed that the public sector should bear all costs, (2) those who randomly chose different options, and (3) those who for all 8 situations chose the same alternative (only A or only B).…”

Section: Dce Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment Preferences for Acute Allergic Reactions: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Löfvendahl,

Andersson,

Olofsson

et al. 2024

JHEOR

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Timely treatment of acute allergic reactions (AARs) is important to minimize reaction severity. Corticosteroid tablets dissolved in water are commonly used in mainstay treatment. A new oral film that dissolves on the tongue provides a faster and less cumbersome alternative to tablets for corticosteroid administration during AARs. This study evaluated patients’ preferences for attributes related to administration mode of corticosteroids in AARs. Methods: A web-based survey was sent to a sample from the adult Swedish population (≥18 years) with experience of corticosteroid treatment for AAR. We assessed the willingness to pay (WTP) for attributes related to corticosteroid treatment by applying a discrete choice experiment (DCE) approach. DCE attributes were administration mode, time to symptom relief, and price. The WTP for each attribute was derived using the attribute’s coefficient in a logistic regression analysis. We specified a forced choice (FC) and an unforced choice (UC) model. In the FC model, the respondents chose between 2 hypothetical treatments and in the UC model, between any of 2 hypothetical treatments and their current treatment. Results: The final study population included 348 subjects, of which 80% were women. All the evaluated DCE attributes were significant predictors for the treatment choice (p<.001). In the FC model, the incremental WTP for an oral film compared with tablets was 409 Swedish kronor (SEK [≈€36.7]), with no other factors considered. In the UC model, the incremental WTP for the oral film compared with tablets was 574 SEK (≈€51.7). After considering the value of the respondents’ current treatment, the WTP for the oral film decreased to 336 SEK (≈€30.3). The total WTP was reduced by 17 SEK (≈€1.5) per minute of shorter time to symptom relief. Subgroup analyses showed that people with circulatory symptoms and experience of swallowing difficulties related to allergy medication had higher WTP for the oral film than the average respondent. Conclusion: The findings show a substantial economic benefit of the oral film vs tablets for patients with AARs in Sweden. This result remained also after compensation for the full value of the patients’ current treatment.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the first pouch purchase of patients in the study could be identified. Willingness-to-pay studies evaluating different pouches note that patients with ostomies tend to place value on staying on their current pouching system even if another system produces better outcomes (37). By identifying the first pouch purchase, pouch switching was analyzed when patients have least adapted to their pouching system.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Patent Activity and Its Potential Association With Healthcare Outcomes: A Case Study of Ostomy Products in Sweden

Calara

¹

,

Althin

²

,

Inglese

³

et al. 2017

Int J Technol Assess Health Care

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PA in the ostomy care industry was associated with reduced healthcare costs, but not necessarily with fewer skin complications. It suggests that there is a health economic benefit from products made by patent intensive companies which may differentiate them from generic comparators, but more research is needed to understand the impact of activities conducive to medical innovation on health outcomes.

show abstract

Elicitation of Ostomy Pouch Preferences

Cited by 8 publications

References 30 publications

Treatment Preferences for Acute Allergic Reactions: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Treatment Preferences for Acute Allergic Reactions: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Treatment Preferences for Acute Allergic Reactions: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Exploring Patent Activity and Its Potential Association With Healthcare Outcomes: A Case Study of Ostomy Products in Sweden

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About