Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 3/2010

01-09-2010 | Original Research Article

Towards Patient-Centered Care for Depression

Conjoint Methods to Tailor Treatment Based on Preferences

Authors: Dr Marsha N. Wittink, Mark Cary, Thomas TenHave, Jonathan Baron, Joseph J. Gallo

Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Issue 3/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background: Although antidepressants and counseling have been shown to be effective in treating patients with depression, non-treatment or under-treatment for depression is common, especially among the elderly and minorities. Previous work on patient preferences has focused on medication versus counseling, but less is known about the value that patients place on attributes of medication and counseling.
Objective: To examine, using conjoint analysis, the relative importance of various attributes of depression treatment at the group level as well as to determine the range of individual-level relative preference weights for specific depression treatment attributes. In addition, to predict what modifications in treatment characteristics are associated with a change in the stated preferred alternative.
Methods: A total of 86 adults who participated in an internet-based panel responded to an online discrete-choice task about depression treatment. Participants chose between medication and counseling based on choice sets presented first for a ‘mild depression’ scenario and then for a ‘severe depression’ scenario. Participants were given 18 choice sets that varied for medication based on type of side effect (nausea, dizziness, and sexual dysfunction) and severity of side effect (mild, moderate, and severe); and for counseling based on frequency of counseling sessions (once per week or every other week) and location of the sessions (mental health professional’s office, primary-care doctor’s office, or office of a spiritual counselor).
Results: Treatment type (counseling vs medication) appeared to be more important in driving treatment choice than any specific attribute that was studied; specifically, counseling was preferred by most of the respondents. After treatment type, location and frequency of treatment were important considerations. Preferred attributes were similar in both the mild and severe depression scenarios. Side effect severity appeared to be most important in driving treatment choice compared with the other attributes studied. Individual-level relative preferences for treatment type revealed a distribution that was roughly bimodal; 27 participants had a strong preference for counseling and 14 had a strong preference for medication.
Conclusions: Estimating individual-level preferences for treatment type allowed us to see the variability in preferences and determine which participants had a strong affinity for medication or counseling. We found that participants preferred counseling over medication, avoided options with severe side effects, and wanted to be seen in the primary-care doctor’s office as opposed to other venues.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2001 Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2001
2.
go back to reference Committee on Crossing the Quality Chasm: Adaptation to Mental Health and Addictive Disorders. Improving the quality of care for mental and substance-use conditions: quality chasm series. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006 Committee on Crossing the Quality Chasm: Adaptation to Mental Health and Addictive Disorders. Improving the quality of care for mental and substance-use conditions: quality chasm series. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006
3.
go back to reference Bridging science and service: a report by the National Advisory Mental Health Council’s Clinical Treatment and Services Research Workgroup. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Mental Health, 1998 [online]. Available from URL: http://wwwapps.nimh.nih.gov/ ecb/archives/nimhbridge.pdf [Accessed 2010 Mar 24] Bridging science and service: a report by the National Advisory Mental Health Council’s Clinical Treatment and Services Research Workgroup. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Mental Health, 1998 [online]. Available from URL: http://​wwwapps.​nimh.​nih.​gov/​ ecb/archives/nimhbridge.pdf [Accessed 2010 Mar 24]
4.
go back to reference Cooper LA, Gonzales JJ, Gallo JJ, et al. The acceptability of treatment for depression among African-American and White primary care patients. Med Care 2003; 41: 479–89PubMed Cooper LA, Gonzales JJ, Gallo JJ, et al. The acceptability of treatment for depression among African-American and White primary care patients. Med Care 2003; 41: 479–89PubMed
5.
go back to reference Glass C, Arnkoff D, Shapiro S. Expectations and preferences. Psychotherapy 2001; 38: 455–61CrossRef Glass C, Arnkoff D, Shapiro S. Expectations and preferences. Psychotherapy 2001; 38: 455–61CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Swift J, Callahan J. The impact of client treatment preferences on outcome: a meta-analysis. J Clin Psychol 2009; 65(4): 368–81PubMedCrossRef Swift J, Callahan J. The impact of client treatment preferences on outcome: a meta-analysis. J Clin Psychol 2009; 65(4): 368–81PubMedCrossRef
7.
8.
go back to reference Bogner HR, Lin JY, Morales KH. Patterns of early adherence to the antidepressant citalopram among primary care patients: the PROSPECT study. Int J Psychiatry Med 2006; 36(1): 103–19PubMedCrossRef Bogner HR, Lin JY, Morales KH. Patterns of early adherence to the antidepressant citalopram among primary care patients: the PROSPECT study. Int J Psychiatry Med 2006; 36(1): 103–19PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Nutting PA, Rost K, Dickinson M, et al. Barriers to initiating depression treatment in primary care practice. J Gen Int Med 2002; 17: 103–11CrossRef Nutting PA, Rost K, Dickinson M, et al. Barriers to initiating depression treatment in primary care practice. J Gen Int Med 2002; 17: 103–11CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Switzer J, Wittink M, Karsch BB, et al. “Pull yourself up by your bootstraps”: a response to depression in older adults. Qual Health Res 2006; 16(9): 1207–16PubMedCrossRef Switzer J, Wittink M, Karsch BB, et al. “Pull yourself up by your bootstraps”: a response to depression in older adults. Qual Health Res 2006; 16(9): 1207–16PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Wittink MN, Dahlberg B, Biruk C, et al. How older adults combine medical and experiential notions of depression. Qual Health Res 2008 Sep; 18(9): 1174–83PubMedCrossRef Wittink MN, Dahlberg B, Biruk C, et al. How older adults combine medical and experiential notions of depression. Qual Health Res 2008 Sep; 18(9): 1174–83PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Thompson J, Scott N. Counseling service features: elders’ preferences and utilization. Clin Gerontol 1991; (11): 39-46 Thompson J, Scott N. Counseling service features: elders’ preferences and utilization. Clin Gerontol 1991; (11): 39-46
13.
go back to reference Dwight-Johnson M, Unützer J, Sherbourne C, et al. Can quality improvement programs for depression in primary care address patient preferences for treatment? Med Care 2001; 39(9): 934–44PubMedCrossRef Dwight-Johnson M, Unützer J, Sherbourne C, et al. Can quality improvement programs for depression in primary care address patient preferences for treatment? Med Care 2001; 39(9): 934–44PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Bedi N, Chilvers C, Churchill R, et al. Assessing effectiveness of treatment of depression in primary care: partially randomised preference trial. Br J Psychiatry 2000; 177: 312–8PubMedCrossRef Bedi N, Chilvers C, Churchill R, et al. Assessing effectiveness of treatment of depression in primary care: partially randomised preference trial. Br J Psychiatry 2000; 177: 312–8PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Rokke PD, Tomhave JA, Jocic Z. The role of client choice and target selection in self-management therapy for depression in older adults. Psychol Aging 1999 Mar; 14(1): 155–69PubMedCrossRef Rokke PD, Tomhave JA, Jocic Z. The role of client choice and target selection in self-management therapy for depression in older adults. Psychol Aging 1999 Mar; 14(1): 155–69PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Luce D, Tukey J. Simultaneous conjoint measurement: a new type of fundamental measurement. J Math Psychol 1964; 1: 1–27CrossRef Luce D, Tukey J. Simultaneous conjoint measurement: a new type of fundamental measurement. J Math Psychol 1964; 1: 1–27CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Anderson N. Functional measurement and psycho-physical judgement. Psychology Rev 1977; 77: 153–70CrossRef Anderson N. Functional measurement and psycho-physical judgement. Psychology Rev 1977; 77: 153–70CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Louviere JJ. Conjoint analysis modelling of stated preferences: a review of theory, methods, recent developments and external validity. J Transport Econ Policy 1988; 22(1): 9–119 Louviere JJ. Conjoint analysis modelling of stated preferences: a review of theory, methods, recent developments and external validity. J Transport Econ Policy 1988; 22(1): 9–119
19.
go back to reference Wardman M. A comparison of revealed preference and stated preference models. J Transport Econ Policy 1988; 22: 71–91 Wardman M. A comparison of revealed preference and stated preference models. J Transport Econ Policy 1988; 22: 71–91
20.
go back to reference Opaluch J, Swallow S, Weaver T, et al. Evaluating impacts from noxious facilities: including public preferences in current siting mechanisms. J Environ Econ Manage 1993; (24): 41-59 Opaluch J, Swallow S, Weaver T, et al. Evaluating impacts from noxious facilities: including public preferences in current siting mechanisms. J Environ Econ Manage 1993; (24): 41-59
21.
go back to reference Adamowicz W, Louviere J, Williams M. Combining revealed preference and stated preference methods for valuing environmental amenities. J Environ Econ Manage 1994; 6: 271–92CrossRef Adamowicz W, Louviere J, Williams M. Combining revealed preference and stated preference methods for valuing environmental amenities. J Environ Econ Manage 1994; 6: 271–92CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Train K, Sonnier G. Mized logit with bounded distributions of correlated partworths. In:Scarpa R, Alberini A, editors. Applications of simulation methods in environmental and resource economics. Dordrecht: Springer, 2005 Train K, Sonnier G. Mized logit with bounded distributions of correlated partworths. In:Scarpa R, Alberini A, editors. Applications of simulation methods in environmental and resource economics. Dordrecht: Springer, 2005
23.
go back to reference Wittink DR, Cattin P. Commercial use of conjoint analysis: an update. J Market 1981; 53: 91–6CrossRef Wittink DR, Cattin P. Commercial use of conjoint analysis: an update. J Market 1981; 53: 91–6CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Green PE, Srinivasan V. Conjoint analysis in marketing: new developments with implications for research and practice. J Market 1990; 54(4): 3–19CrossRef Green PE, Srinivasan V. Conjoint analysis in marketing: new developments with implications for research and practice. J Market 1990; 54(4): 3–19CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Ryan M, Farrar S. Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ 2000 Jun 3; 320(7248): 1530–3PubMedCrossRef Ryan M, Farrar S. Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ 2000 Jun 3; 320(7248): 1530–3PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Ryan M, Gerard K. Using discrete choice experiments to value health care programmes: current practice and future reflections. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2003; 2(1): 55–64PubMed Ryan M, Gerard K. Using discrete choice experiments to value health care programmes: current practice and future reflections. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2003; 2(1): 55–64PubMed
27.
go back to reference Bridges J, Kinter E, Kidane L, et al. Things are looking up since we started listening to patients: trends in the application of conjoint analysis in health 1982–2007. Patient 2008; 1(4): 273–82PubMedCrossRef Bridges J, Kinter E, Kidane L, et al. Things are looking up since we started listening to patients: trends in the application of conjoint analysis in health 1982–2007. Patient 2008; 1(4): 273–82PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Ross M-A, Avery AJ, Foss AJE. Views of older people on cataract surgery options: an assessment of preferences by conjoint analysis. Qual Saf Health Care 2003; 12: 13–7PubMedCrossRef Ross M-A, Avery AJ, Foss AJE. Views of older people on cataract surgery options: an assessment of preferences by conjoint analysis. Qual Saf Health Care 2003; 12: 13–7PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Meister H, Lausberg I, Kiessling J. Identifying the needs of elderly, hearing-impaired persons: the importance and utility of hearing aid attributes. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2002; 259(10): 531–4PubMed Meister H, Lausberg I, Kiessling J. Identifying the needs of elderly, hearing-impaired persons: the importance and utility of hearing aid attributes. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2002; 259(10): 531–4PubMed
30.
go back to reference Ratcliffe J, Buxton M, McGarry T, et al. Patients’ preferences for characteristics associated with treatments for osteoarthritis. Rheumatology 2004; 43: 337–45PubMedCrossRef Ratcliffe J, Buxton M, McGarry T, et al. Patients’ preferences for characteristics associated with treatments for osteoarthritis. Rheumatology 2004; 43: 337–45PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference van den Berg B, Van Dommelen P, Stam P, et al. Preferences and choices for care and health insurance. Soc Sci Med 2008 Jun; 66(12): 2448–59PubMedCrossRef van den Berg B, Van Dommelen P, Stam P, et al. Preferences and choices for care and health insurance. Soc Sci Med 2008 Jun; 66(12): 2448–59PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Oudhoff JP, Timmermans DR, Knol DL, et al. Prioritising patients on surgical waiting lists: a conjoint analysis study on the priority judgments of patients, surgeons, occupational physicians, and general practitioners. Soc Sci Med 2007 May; 64(9): 1863–75PubMedCrossRef Oudhoff JP, Timmermans DR, Knol DL, et al. Prioritising patients on surgical waiting lists: a conjoint analysis study on the priority judgments of patients, surgeons, occupational physicians, and general practitioners. Soc Sci Med 2007 May; 64(9): 1863–75PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Ryan M, Hughes J. Using conjoint analysis to assess women’s preferences for miscarriage management. Health Econ 1998; 6(3): 261–73CrossRef Ryan M, Hughes J. Using conjoint analysis to assess women’s preferences for miscarriage management. Health Econ 1998; 6(3): 261–73CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Flach SD, Diener A. Eliciting patients’ preferences for cigarette and alcohol cessation: an application of conjoint analysis. Addict Behav 2004; 29: 791–9PubMedCrossRef Flach SD, Diener A. Eliciting patients’ preferences for cigarette and alcohol cessation: an application of conjoint analysis. Addict Behav 2004; 29: 791–9PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Shumway M, Saunders T, Shern D, et al. Preferences for schizophrenia treatment outcomes among public policy makers, consumers, families, and providers. Psychiatr Serv 2003; 54: 1124–8PubMedCrossRef Shumway M, Saunders T, Shern D, et al. Preferences for schizophrenia treatment outcomes among public policy makers, consumers, families, and providers. Psychiatr Serv 2003; 54: 1124–8PubMedCrossRef
36.
go back to reference Dwight-Johnson M, Lagomasino IT, Aisenberg E, et al. Using conjoint analysis to assess depression treatment preferences among low-income latinos. Psychiatr Serv 2004; 55(8): 934–6PubMedCrossRef Dwight-Johnson M, Lagomasino IT, Aisenberg E, et al. Using conjoint analysis to assess depression treatment preferences among low-income latinos. Psychiatr Serv 2004; 55(8): 934–6PubMedCrossRef
37.
go back to reference Cooper LA, Brown C, Thi Vu H, et al. Primary care patients’ opinions regarding the importance of various aspects of care for depression. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2000; 22(3): 163–73PubMedCrossRef Cooper LA, Brown C, Thi Vu H, et al. Primary care patients’ opinions regarding the importance of various aspects of care for depression. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2000; 22(3): 163–73PubMedCrossRef
38.
go back to reference Jonathan Baron’s questionnaire studies [online]. Available from URL: http://www.psych.upenn.edu/∼baron/q.htm [Accessed 2010 Apr 23] Jonathan Baron’s questionnaire studies [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​psych.​upenn.​edu/​∼baron/​q.​htm [Accessed 2010 Apr 23]
39.
go back to reference Baron J. Thinking and deciding. 3rd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000 Baron J. Thinking and deciding. 3rd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000
40.
go back to reference Gurmankin AD, Baron J, Hershey JC, et al. The role of physicians’ recommendations in medical treatment decisions. Med Decis Making 2002; 22: 262–71PubMed Gurmankin AD, Baron J, Hershey JC, et al. The role of physicians’ recommendations in medical treatment decisions. Med Decis Making 2002; 22: 262–71PubMed
41.
go back to reference Gurmankin LA, Baron J. How bad is a 10% chance of losing a toe? Judgments of probabilistic conditions by doctors and laypeople. Mem Cognit 2005; 33(8): 1399–406CrossRef Gurmankin LA, Baron J. How bad is a 10% chance of losing a toe? Judgments of probabilistic conditions by doctors and laypeople. Mem Cognit 2005; 33(8): 1399–406CrossRef
42.
go back to reference Baron J, Asch DA, Fagerlin A, et al. Effect of assessment method on the discrepancy between judgments of health disorders people have and do not have: a web study. Med Decis Making 2003 Sep–Oct; 23(5): 422–34PubMedCrossRef Baron J, Asch DA, Fagerlin A, et al. Effect of assessment method on the discrepancy between judgments of health disorders people have and do not have: a web study. Med Decis Making 2003 Sep–Oct; 23(5): 422–34PubMedCrossRef
43.
go back to reference Gurmankin AD, Baron J, Armstrong K. Intended message versus message received in hypothetical physician risk communications: exploring the gap. Risk Anal 2004; 24: 1337–47PubMedCrossRef Gurmankin AD, Baron J, Armstrong K. Intended message versus message received in hypothetical physician risk communications: exploring the gap. Risk Anal 2004; 24: 1337–47PubMedCrossRef
44.
go back to reference Kuhfeld W. Marketing research methods for SAS: experimental design, choice, conjoint, and graphical techniques. SAS 9.1 ed. Cary (NC): SAS Institute Inc., 2005 Kuhfeld W. Marketing research methods for SAS: experimental design, choice, conjoint, and graphical techniques. SAS 9.1 ed. Cary (NC): SAS Institute Inc., 2005
45.
go back to reference Schulberg HC, Katon W, Simon GE, et al. Treating major depression in primary care: an update of the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Practice Guidelines. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1998; 55: 1121–7PubMedCrossRef Schulberg HC, Katon W, Simon GE, et al. Treating major depression in primary care: an update of the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Practice Guidelines. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1998; 55: 1121–7PubMedCrossRef
46.
go back to reference Johnson R, Orme B. How many questions should you ask in choice-based conjoint studies? [Sawtooth Software research paper series]. Beaver Creek (CO): Sawtooth Software Inc., Advanced Research Techniques Forum, 1996 Johnson R, Orme B. How many questions should you ask in choice-based conjoint studies? [Sawtooth Software research paper series]. Beaver Creek (CO): Sawtooth Software Inc., Advanced Research Techniques Forum, 1996
47.
go back to reference Train K. Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003CrossRef Train K. Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003CrossRef
48.
go back to reference Marshall P, Bradlow ET. A unified approach to conjoint analysis models. J Am Stat Assoc 2002; 97: 674–82CrossRef Marshall P, Bradlow ET. A unified approach to conjoint analysis models. J Am Stat Assoc 2002; 97: 674–82CrossRef
49.
go back to reference Gum A, Areán P, Hunkeler E, et al. Depression treatment preferences in older primary care patients. Gerontologist 2006; 46: 14–22PubMedCrossRef Gum A, Areán P, Hunkeler E, et al. Depression treatment preferences in older primary care patients. Gerontologist 2006; 46: 14–22PubMedCrossRef
50.
go back to reference Jaycox L, Asarnow J, Sherbourne C, et al. Adolescent primary care patients’ preferences for depression treatment. Adm Policy Ment Health 2006; 33(2): 198–207PubMedCrossRef Jaycox L, Asarnow J, Sherbourne C, et al. Adolescent primary care patients’ preferences for depression treatment. Adm Policy Ment Health 2006; 33(2): 198–207PubMedCrossRef
51.
go back to reference Givens J. Ethnicity and preferences for depression treatment. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2007; 29: 254–63CrossRef Givens J. Ethnicity and preferences for depression treatment. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2007; 29: 254–63CrossRef
52.
go back to reference Wind J, Green P, Shifflet D, et al. Courtyard by Marriott: designing a hotel facility with consumer-based marketing models. Interfaces 1989; 19 (Jan–Feb): 25–47CrossRef Wind J, Green P, Shifflet D, et al. Courtyard by Marriott: designing a hotel facility with consumer-based marketing models. Interfaces 1989; 19 (Jan–Feb): 25–47CrossRef
53.
go back to reference Vavra T, Green P, Krieger A. Evaluating EZ-pass. Mark Res 1999; 11: 5–16 Vavra T, Green P, Krieger A. Evaluating EZ-pass. Mark Res 1999; 11: 5–16
54.
go back to reference Chakraborty G, Ettenson R, Gaeth G. How consumers choose health insurance. J Health Care Mark 1994; 14(1): 21–33PubMed Chakraborty G, Ettenson R, Gaeth G. How consumers choose health insurance. J Health Care Mark 1994; 14(1): 21–33PubMed
55.
go back to reference Cunningham CE, Buchanan D, Deal K. Modelling patient-centered children’s health services using choice-based conjoint hierarchical Bayes. Paper presented at 10th Annual Sawtooth Software Conference Proceedings; 2004 Apr 15–17; San Antonio (TX) Cunningham CE, Buchanan D, Deal K. Modelling patient-centered children’s health services using choice-based conjoint hierarchical Bayes. Paper presented at 10th Annual Sawtooth Software Conference Proceedings; 2004 Apr 15–17; San Antonio (TX)
56.
go back to reference Cunningham CE, Deal K, Rimas H, et al. Modeling the information preferences of parents of children with mental health problems: a discrete choice conjoint experiment. J Abnorm Psychol 2008; 36(36): 1123–38CrossRef Cunningham CE, Deal K, Rimas H, et al. Modeling the information preferences of parents of children with mental health problems: a discrete choice conjoint experiment. J Abnorm Psychol 2008; 36(36): 1123–38CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Towards Patient-Centered Care for Depression
Conjoint Methods to Tailor Treatment Based on Preferences
Authors
Dr Marsha N. Wittink
Mark Cary
Thomas TenHave
Jonathan Baron
Joseph J. Gallo
Publication date
01-09-2010
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Issue 3/2010
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Electronic ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/11530660-000000000-00000

Other articles of this Issue 3/2010

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 3/2010 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

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.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine