Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
PharmacoEconomics
Published in: PharmacoEconomics 2/2009

01-02-2009 | Original Research Article

Willingness to Pay for a Treatment for Pain in Multiple Sclerosis

Authors: Mr Michael Iskedjian, Olivier Desjardins, Charles Piwko, Basil Bereza, Barbara Jaszewski, Thomas R. Einarson

Published in: PharmacoEconomics | Issue 2/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic neurological disease that affects 240 per 100 000 Canadians. Of these patients, 10–80% (average 70%) experience pain. Sativex® is a cannabis-based drug recently approved for neuropathic pain.
Objectives: In this study, we determine individuals’ preferences between two treatment options as well as the willingness to pay (WTP) for Sativex®, expressed as the amount they would pay in insurance premiums to have access to that treatment.
Methods: The WTP instrument comprised a decision board as a visual aid, and a questionnaire. A decision board helps clinicians standardize the presentation of treatment information. In this study, the decision board described two treatment options: a three-drug combination (gabapentin, amytriptyline, acetaminophen [paracetamol] {i.e. pills}) and the three-drug combination plus Sativex® (i.e. ‘pills and oral spray’). Information on efficacy and adverse effects was taken from trial data; wording was guided by a panel of neurologists and tested for clarity on lay people. The instrument was administered to 500 participants from Canada’s general population using the bidding game approach. Descriptive statistics were calculated.
Results: Mean (SD) age of participants was 39 (13) years, with a female: male distribution of 56: 44. The decision board was presented in both English (85%) and French (15%). Of 500 interviewees, 253 (50.6%) chose the ‘pills and oral spray’. Mean monthly WTP for the insurance premium for those who chose the ‘pills and oral spray’ was $Can8 (SD ± 15, median 4, range 0–200).
Conclusions: Assuming that 51% of the general population are willing to pay additional premiums as reported in this study, the premiums collected would cover the cost of Sativex® for all Canadian MS patients experiencing pain, with a surplus.
Footnotes
1
The sample size was based on significance and a desired precision level of 5%. The calculation was based on the assumption that equal proportions of participants would select each of the three preference options (i.e. treatment option 1, treatment option 2 and indifferent). Furthermore, we assumed that ≥90% of the data collected would be usable. Therefore, we estimated that the minimum required sample size was 450 participants in total. We ended up collecting data from 500 participants.
 
Literature
1.
Bruck G, Stadelmann C. Inflammation and degeneration in multiple sclerosis. Neurol Sci 2003; 24 Suppl. 5: S265–7CrossRef
2.
3.
Beck C, Metz L, Svenson L, et al. Regional variation of multiple sclerosis prevalence in Canada. Multiple Sclerosis 2005; 11: 516–9PubMedCrossRef
4.
Brichetto G, Messmer Uccelli M, Mancardi G, et al. Symptomatic medication use in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2003; 9: 458–60PubMedCrossRef
5.
Archibald C, McGrath P, Ritvo P. Pain prevalence, severity and impact in a clinical sample of multiple sclerosis patients. Pain 1994; 58: 89–93PubMedCrossRef
6.
Solaro C, Lunardi G, Mancardi G. Pain and MS. Int MS J 2003; 10 (1): 14–9PubMed
7.
Burks J. A review of current medical aspects of multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Rehabil 1992; 6: 131–9
8.
Indaco A, Iachetta C, Nappi C, et al. Chronic and acute pain syndromes in patients with multiple sclerosis. Acta Neurol Scand 1994; 16: 97–102
9.
10.
11.
Piwko C, Desjardins OB, Bereza BG, et al. Pain due to multiple sclerosis: analysis of the prevalence and economic burden in Canada. Pain Res Manag 2007; 12 (4): 259–65PubMed
12.
Pollman W, Feneberg W, Steinbrecher A, et al. Therapy of pain syndromes in multiple sclerosis: an overview with evidence-based recommendations. Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr 2005; 73: 268–85CrossRef
13.
14.
15.
Gafni A. Willingness-to-pay as a measure of benefits: relevant questions in the context of public decision making about health care programmes. Med Care 1991; 29: 1246–52PubMedCrossRef
16.
O’Brien B, Gafni A. When do the ‘dollars’ make sense? Toward a conceptual framework for contingent valuation studies in health care. Med Dec Mak 1996; 16: 288–302CrossRef
17.
18.
Gafni A. Willingness-to-pay (WTP) in the context of an economic evaluation of healthcare programs: theory and practice. Am J Manage Care 1997; 3 Suppl. 5: S21–32
19.
O’Brien B, Goeree R, Gafni A, et al. Assessing the value of a new pharmaceutical: a feasibility study of contingent valuation in managed care. Med Care 1998; 36: 370–84PubMedCrossRef
20.
Matthews D, Rocchi A, Gafni A. Putting your money where your mouth is: willingness to pay for dental gel. Pharmacoeconomics 2002; 20 (4): 245–55PubMedCrossRef
21.
Levine M, Gafni A, Markham B, et al. A bedside decision instrument to elicit a patient’s preference concerning adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Ann Int Med 1992; 117: 53–8PubMed
22.
Whelan T, Levine M, Willan A, et al. Effect of a decision aid on knowledge and treatment decision making for breast cancer surgery: a randomized trial. JAMA 2004; 292: 435–41PubMedCrossRef
23.
Rog D, Nurmikko T, Friede T, et al. Randomized controlled trial of cannabis based medicine in central pain due to multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2005; 65: 812–9PubMedCrossRef
24.
Miles M, Huberman A. Examples of strategies in qualitative inquiry: qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications, 1994: 27–30
25.
26.
27.
28.
Drummond M, O’Brien B, Stoddart G, et al. Cost-benefit analysis. In: Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, et al., editors. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. New York: Oxford University Press Inc, 2005: 203–31
Metadata
Title
Willingness to Pay for a Treatment for Pain in Multiple Sclerosis
Authors
Mr Michael Iskedjian
Olivier Desjardins
Charles Piwko
Basil Bereza
Barbara Jaszewski
Thomas R. Einarson
Publication date
01-02-2009
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
PharmacoEconomics / Issue 2/2009
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200927020-00005

Other articles of this Issue 2/2009

PharmacoEconomics 2/2009 Go to the issue

Original Research Article

Comparison of Markov Model and Discrete-Event Simulation Techniques for HIV

Leading Article

Neuropathic Pain

Review Article

Economics of Treatments for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Editorial

Controlling Cervical Cancer

Review Article

Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of Human Papillomavirus Vaccine

Original Research Article

Challenges in Merging Medicaid and Medicare Databases to Obtain Healthcare Costs for Dual-Eligible Beneficiaries