Pss65 - Development of the Neurotrophic Keratopathy Questionnaire: Qualitative Research

Abstract

delivery (via punctal plug, subconjunctival or intracameral route) and implant (p¼0.011) based upon effectiveness and cost. Other factors influencing patient preference were clear center vision, outdoor mobility, travelling distance during follow-ups, and treatment-associated symptoms (vision blurring, drowsiness, or inhibition of sexual performance). No studies assessing surgical treatment options were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence clearly indicates that glaucoma patients have preference towards more efficacious and less frequent medication regimens. In addition, patients are willing to accept novel treatment options such as surgical implants and sustained release medication depots. However, scarce evidence necessitates the need for more research focusing on patient preferences towards surgical treatment options. OBJECTIVES:To estimate preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for treatment features of omalizumab among people with CIU or experiencing dermatological conditions with similar symptoms in Australia. METHODS: Treatment attributes and levels were informed by literature and clinicians, covering 3 areas: treatment administration follow up and cost, efficacy and safety. In the online discrete choice experiment (DCE), respondents saw 8 different treatment scenarios showing standard therapy against two hypothetical treatments. A rank ordered logit model provided estimates of marginal utilities and latent class analyses employed to model preference heterogeneity. RESULTS: Overall 124 patients completed the survey including 26 CIU patients (16 were severe with UAS7 28+). Attributes relating to efficacy (Itchiness, Swelling, Impact on life activities, Sleep, Psychological aspects, limitations and physical appearance) were significant, with increasing itchiness, impact on life activities and worsening of physical appearance negatively driving choices (p<0.01). Patients preferred omalizumab compared to standard therapy (p<0.01). CIU patients appear less price sensitive compared to noneCIU patients (p<0.05). Latent class analyses identified three preference segments: 50% of the sample valued efficacy with WTP of $42.66 to $90 for level improvements across efficacy attributes (p<0.05). The second largest segment (35%) was price-sensitive and did not consider most benefits of treatment beyond price (p<0.01); 15% were price insensitive. CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrate patient preference for omalizumab and specifically the efficacy of a treatment, highlighting the importance of quality of life among both CIU and those suffering from similar skin conditions. However differences between groups was apparent, with psychological aspects of treatment influencing treatment choice among non-CIU patients more than CIU patients, and cost being a significant driver of treatment choice for non-CIU patients but less so for CIU patients.