Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Osteoporosis International 6/2011

01-06-2011 | Original Article

Patient preferences for osteoporosis in Spain: a discrete choice experiment

Authors: J. Darbà, G. Restovic, L. Kaskens, M. A. Balbona, A. Carbonell, P. Cavero, M. Jordana, C. Prieto, Á. Molina, I. Padró

Published in: Osteoporosis International | Issue 6/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Summary

In Spain, various treatments are available to prevent osteoporotic fractures. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used to investigate the importance of different treatment aspects and its influence on patients’ preferences. All attributes included as type and place of drug administration as well as costs showed to be significant predictors of choice. Spanish osteoporosis patients have well-defined preferences and accept trade-offs among attributes.

Introduction

This study was designed to identify patient preferences for different aspects of osteoporosis treatments in Spain.

Methods

Main attributes of severe osteoporosis treatments were determined by literature review and consultations with nurses. The discrete choice experiment included three attributes: type of drug administration, place of administration, plus a cost attribute in order to estimate willingness to pay for improvements in attribute levels. A pilot study with 50 patients was performed to identify the areas of misunderstanding. One hundred sixty-six patients with a diagnosis of osteoporosis and severe osteoporosis were presented with pairs of hypothetical treatment profiles with different type of administration levels, places of administration and costs. Questions to collect socio-demographic and disease-related treatment data were also included. Data were analysed using a random effects probit model.

Results

All attributes had the expected polarity and were significant predictors of choice. Patients were willing to pay 183 €/month to have a subcutaneous injection once per day rather than an intravenous injection once per year. Patients with osteoporosis were willing to pay 121 €/month to have medical support when administering the drug treatment at home rather than being admitted several hours to a hospital for drug administration.

Conclusion

Spanish osteoporosis patients have well-defined preferences among treatment attributes and are willing to accept trade-offs among attributes. Participants indicated that they are willing to accept self medication with medical support rather than being hospitalised for several hours. The perspective of the patients should be taken into account when making treatment decisions.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bouza C, López T, Palma M, Amate JM (2007) Hospitalised osteoporotic vertebral fractures in Spain: analysis of the national hospital discharge registry. Osteoporos Int 18(5):649–657PubMedCrossRef Bouza C, López T, Palma M, Amate JM (2007) Hospitalised osteoporotic vertebral fractures in Spain: analysis of the national hospital discharge registry. Osteoporos Int 18(5):649–657PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Greenfield S, Kaplan S, Ware JE Jr (1985) Expanding patient involvement in care. Effects on patient outcomes. Ann Intern Med 102:520–528PubMed Greenfield S, Kaplan S, Ware JE Jr (1985) Expanding patient involvement in care. Effects on patient outcomes. Ann Intern Med 102:520–528PubMed
7.
go back to reference Edworthy SM, Devins GM (1999) Improving medication adherence though patient education distinguishing between appropriate and inappropriate utilization. J Rheumatol 26:1793–1801PubMed Edworthy SM, Devins GM (1999) Improving medication adherence though patient education distinguishing between appropriate and inappropriate utilization. J Rheumatol 26:1793–1801PubMed
8.
go back to reference Daltroy LH (1993) Doctor-patient communication in rheumatological disorders. Baillières Clin Rheumatol 7:221–239PubMedCrossRef Daltroy LH (1993) Doctor-patient communication in rheumatological disorders. Baillières Clin Rheumatol 7:221–239PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Solomon DH, Avorn J, Katz JN et al (2005) Compliance with osteoporosis medication. Arch Intern Med 165:2414–2419PubMedCrossRef Solomon DH, Avorn J, Katz JN et al (2005) Compliance with osteoporosis medication. Arch Intern Med 165:2414–2419PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference de Bekker-Grob EW, Essink-Bot ML, Meerding WJ et al (2008) Patients’ preferences for osteoporosis drug treatment: a discrete choice experiment. Osteoporos Int 19:1029–1037PubMedCrossRef de Bekker-Grob EW, Essink-Bot ML, Meerding WJ et al (2008) Patients’ preferences for osteoporosis drug treatment: a discrete choice experiment. Osteoporos Int 19:1029–1037PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Fraenkel L, Gulanski B, Wittink D (2006) Patient Treatment Preferences for Osteoporosis. Arthritis Rheum 55(5):729–735PubMedCrossRef Fraenkel L, Gulanski B, Wittink D (2006) Patient Treatment Preferences for Osteoporosis. Arthritis Rheum 55(5):729–735PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Report of a WHO Study Group. Geneva, World Health Organization, 1994 (WHO Technical Report Series, No. 843) Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Report of a WHO Study Group. Geneva, World Health Organization, 1994 (WHO Technical Report Series, No. 843)
13.
go back to reference Green W (1998) LIMDEP Version 8, Users Manual. Econometric Software Inc Green W (1998) LIMDEP Version 8, Users Manual. Econometric Software Inc
14.
go back to reference Propper C (1995) The disutility of time spent on the United Kingdom’s National Health Service waiting lists. J Hum Resour 30:677–700CrossRef Propper C (1995) The disutility of time spent on the United Kingdom’s National Health Service waiting lists. J Hum Resour 30:677–700CrossRef
15.
go back to reference de Bekker-Grob EW, Essink-Bot ML, Meerding WJ et al (2009) Preferences of GPs and patients for preventive osteoporosis drug treatment. A Discrete-choice experiment Pharmacoeconomics 27(3):211–219 de Bekker-Grob EW, Essink-Bot ML, Meerding WJ et al (2009) Preferences of GPs and patients for preventive osteoporosis drug treatment. A Discrete-choice experiment Pharmacoeconomics 27(3):211–219
16.
go back to reference Ryan M (1999) Using conjoint analysis to take account of patient preferences and go beyond health outcomes: an application to in vitro fertilisation. Soc Sci Med 48:535–546PubMedCrossRef Ryan M (1999) Using conjoint analysis to take account of patient preferences and go beyond health outcomes: an application to in vitro fertilisation. Soc Sci Med 48:535–546PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference San Miguel F, Ryan M, McIntosh E (2000) Applying conjoint analysis in economic evaluations: an application to menorragia. Appl Econ 32:823–833CrossRef San Miguel F, Ryan M, McIntosh E (2000) Applying conjoint analysis in economic evaluations: an application to menorragia. Appl Econ 32:823–833CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Lloyd A, McIntosh E, Price M (2005) The importance of drug adverse effects compared with seizure control for people with epilepsy. A Discrete choice experiment. Pharmacoeconomics 23(11):1167–1181PubMedCrossRef Lloyd A, McIntosh E, Price M (2005) The importance of drug adverse effects compared with seizure control for people with epilepsy. A Discrete choice experiment. Pharmacoeconomics 23(11):1167–1181PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Patient preferences for osteoporosis in Spain: a discrete choice experiment
Authors
J. Darbà
G. Restovic
L. Kaskens
M. A. Balbona
A. Carbonell
P. Cavero
M. Jordana
C. Prieto
Á. Molina
I. Padró
Publication date
01-06-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Osteoporosis International / Issue 6/2011
Print ISSN: 0937-941X
Electronic ISSN: 1433-2965
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-010-1382-3

Other articles of this Issue 6/2011

Osteoporosis International 6/2011 Go to the issue