Patient preferences for dry powder inhaler attributes in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in France: a discrete choice experiment

被引:20
|
作者
Hawken, Natalia [1 ]
Torvinen, Saku [2 ]
Neine, Mohamed-Elmoctar [3 ]
Amri, Ikbel [4 ]
Toumi, Mondher [3 ]
Aballea, Samuel [3 ]
Plich, Adam [2 ]
Roche, Nicolas [5 ]
机构
[1] Creativ Ceutical, Westblaak 92, NL-3012 KM Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Teva Pharmaceut Europe BV, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Creativ Ceutical SARL, 215 Rue Faubourg St Honore, F-75008 Paris, France
[4] Creativ Ceutical, Rue Lac Huron Residence Farah,Bloc B, F-1053 Les Berges Du Lac, France
[5] Univ Paris 05, Cochin Hosp Grp, AP HP, Resp & Intens Care Med, Paris, France
来源
BMC PULMONARY MEDICINE | 2017年 / 17卷
关键词
Discrete choice experiment; Asthma; COPD; Patient preference; Willingness to pay; METERED-DOSE INHALER; COPD; SATISFACTION; DEVICE; MANAGEMENT; UTILITIES; ERRORS; EASE;
D O I
10.1186/s12890-017-0439-x
中图分类号
R56 [呼吸系及胸部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are often used in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) therapies. Using the discrete choice experiment (DCE) methodology, this study conducted in France was designed to assess patients' preferences for different attributes of DPIs. Methods: Attributes of DPIs were defined based on a literature review, patient focus group discussions and interviews with healthcare professionals (qualitative phase of the study). An online survey was then conducted among French patients with asthma or COPD to elicit patient preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for these attributes using the DCE methodology (quantitative phase). A fractional factorial design including three blocks of 12 choice sets was created. Each choice set comprised three alternatives: two fictitious inhalers and the patient's current inhaler. Marginal utilities were estimated using a ranked ordered logit model. Interactions between attributes and disease (asthma or COPD) were tested. Results: Six DPI attributes were defined based on the qualitative phase: ease of use/fool-proof priming; accurate and easy-to-read dose counter; dose confirmation; hygiene of the mouthpiece; flexibility of the device handling; ability to use the inhaler with breathing difficulties. Overall, 201 patients with asthma and 93 with COPD were included in the online survey. Patients with asthma placed most value on an inhaler that requires one step for dose preparation (WTP (sic)4.83 [95% CI:(sic)3.77-(sic)5.90], relative to an inhaler requiring four steps) and one that could be used during episodes of breathing difficulties (WTP(sic)4.49 [95% CI:(sic)2.95-(sic)6.02]). Patients with COPD placed most value on an inhaler that could be used during episodes of breathing difficulties (WTP(sic)7.70 [95% CI: (sic) 5.65-(sic)9.76]) and on the accuracy of the dose counter (WTP(sic)5.87 [95% CI:(sic)3.98-(sic)7.77]). Conclusion: This study suggests that asthma and COPD patients would be willing to change their inhaler if they were offered the option of a new inhaler with improved characteristics and they place a high value on an inhaler with ease of use during breathing difficulty episodes.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A Systematic and Critical Review of Discrete Choice Experiments in Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
    Collacott, Hannah
    Zhang, Dian
    Heidenreich, Sebastian
    Tervonen, Tommi
    PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2022, 15 (01): : 55 - 68
  • [42] Patient preferences for important attributes of bipolar depression treatments: a discrete choice experiment
    Ng-Mak, Daisy
    Poon, Jiat-Ling
    Roberts, Laurie
    Kleinman, Leah
    Revicki, Dennis A.
    Rajagopalan, Krithika
    PATIENT PREFERENCE AND ADHERENCE, 2018, 12 : 35 - 44
  • [43] Patient and oncologist preferences for attributes of treatments in advanced melanoma: a discrete choice experiment
    Liu, Frank Xiaoqing
    Witt, Edward A.
    Ebbinghaus, Scot
    Beyer, Grace DiBonaventura
    Shinde, Reshma
    Basurto, Enrique
    Joseph, Richard W.
    PATIENT PREFERENCE AND ADHERENCE, 2017, 11 : 1389 - 1399
  • [44] Inhaler technique and training in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma
    Capstick, Toby G. D.
    Clifton, Ian J.
    EXPERT REVIEW OF RESPIRATORY MEDICINE, 2012, 6 (01) : 91 - 103
  • [45] Patient preferences for the diagnosis of coeliac disease: A discrete choice experiment
    Shiha, Mohamed G.
    Wickramasekera, Nyantara
    Raju, Suneil A.
    Penny, Hugo A.
    Sanders, David S.
    UNITED EUROPEAN GASTROENTEROLOGY JOURNAL, 2024,
  • [46] Wixela™ Inhub™ dry powder inhaler: In vitro performance compared with Advair Diskus® and inhalation profiles in patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
    Cooper, Andrew
    Newcomb, Claire
    Ward, Jonathan K.
    Allan, Richard
    Wallace, Roisin
    ALLERGY AND ASTHMA PROCEEDINGS, 2019, 40 (05) : 360 - 360
  • [47] Wixela® Inhub® Dry Powder Inhaler - In Vitro Performance Compared with Advair Diskus and Inhalation Profiles in Patients with Asthma or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
    Cooper, A.
    Newcomb, C.
    Wallace, R.
    Canham, K.
    Ward, J.
    Allan, R.
    Berry, M.
    Parker, J.
    Clift, E.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2019, 199
  • [48] Fluticasone furoate/vilanterol dry-powder inhaler: a guide to its use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
    McKeage K.
    Drugs & Therapy Perspectives, 2015, 31 (4) : 112 - 117
  • [49] Umeclidinium/vilanterol dry-powder inhaler in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a guide to its use in the EU
    Syed Y.Y.
    Lyseng-Williamson K.A.
    Blair H.A.
    Deeks E.D.
    Drugs & Therapy Perspectives, 2016, 32 (7) : 276 - 281
  • [50] Efficacy and safety of budesonide/formoterol via a dry powder inhaler in Chinese patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
    Zhong, Nanshan
    Zheng, Jinping
    Wen, Fuqiang
    Yang, Lan
    Chen, Ping
    Xiu, Qingyu
    Yao, Wanzhen
    Sun, Tieying
    Zhao, Ziwen
    Shen, Huahao
    Shi, Yi
    Lin, Jiangtao
    Li, Qiang
    CURRENT MEDICAL RESEARCH AND OPINION, 2012, 28 (02) : 257 - 265