Erratum to: Patient preferences for treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer in Japan: a discrete-choice experiment

ObjectivesWith novel antiandrogen treatments of varying clinical benefits and risks becoming available, this study investigates how patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) value differences in treatment characteristics.DesignCross-sectional observational study.SettingA discrete choice experiment was conducted. Patients chose between two hypothetical non-metastatic CRPC (nmCRPC) treatments defined by six attributes: risk of fatigue, falls or fracture, cognitive impairment, hypertension, rashes as side effects to treatment and extension of time until cancer-related pain occurs.ParticipantsA total of 137 adult male patients with CRPC with no prior experience with chemotherapy and with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status 0–1 were recruited. Patients were excluded if they participated in an investigational programme outside of routine clinical practice, had a clinically relevant medical or psychiatric condition, or diagnosis of visceral/other metastases not related to the prostate, or were otherwise deemed ineligible by the referring physician.Primary outcome measuresRelative preference weights and relative importance of the attributes was estimated by hierarchical Bayesian logistic regression.ResultsAmong the treatment attributes, ‘risk of cognitive impairment as a side effect of treatment’ was the most important attribute (relative importance (RI) (95% CI): 27.47% (24.80% to 30.14%)), followed by ‘extension of time until cancer-related pain occurs’ (RI (95% CI): 17.87% (15.49% to 20.25%)) and the ‘risk of falls or fracture’ (RI (95% CI): 15.99% (14.73% to 17.25%)). The ‘risk of hypertension as a side effect of treatment’ (RI (95% CI): 13.77% (12.73% to 14.81%)) had similar RI as ‘risk of rashes as a side effect of treatment’ (RI (95% CI): 13.17% (12.15% to 14.19%)), followed by the ‘risk of fatigue as a side effect of treatment’ (RI (95% CI): 11.74% (10.75% to 12.73%)).ConclusionsPatients consider the risk of cognitive impairment as a side effect of treatment as the most important attribute in nmCRPC, followed by the extension of time until cancer-related pain occurs, and the risk of falls and fracture. These features should be considered in treatment decision making for nmCRPC in Japan.

Download Full-text

Patient Preferences for Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Treatments: A Discrete Choice Experiment Among Men in Three European Countries

Advances in Therapy ◽

10.1007/s12325-018-0861-3 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 36 (2) ◽

pp. 318-332 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Hayley M. de Freitas ◽

Tetsuro Ito ◽

Monica Hadi ◽

Gemma Al-Jassar ◽

Mickaël Henry-Szatkowski ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Prostate Cancer ◽

Discrete Choice Experiment ◽

Discrete Choice ◽

Patient Preferences ◽

Choice Experiment ◽

European Countries ◽

Cancer Treatments ◽

Hormone Sensitive ◽

Prostate Cancer Treatments

Download Full-text

Patient preferences for specialist outpatient video consultations: A discrete choice experiment

Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare ◽

10.1177/1357633x211022898 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1357633X2110228

Author(s):

Centaine L Snoswell ◽

Anthony C Smith ◽

Matthew Page ◽

Liam J Caffery

Keyword(s):

General Practitioner ◽

Discrete Choice Experiment ◽

Discrete Choice ◽

Patient Preferences ◽

Choice Experiment ◽

Healthcare Delivery ◽

General Practitioner Practice ◽

Specialist Care ◽

Time Away ◽

Out Of Pocket Costs

Introduction Telehealth has been shown to improve access to care, reduce personal expenses and reduce the need for travel. Despite these benefits, patients may be less inclined to seek a telehealth service, if they consider it inferior to an in-person encounter. The aims of this study were to identify patient preferences for attributes of a healthcare service and to quantify the value of these attributes. Methods We surveyed patients who had taken an outpatient telehealth consult in the previous year using a survey that included a discrete choice experiment. We investigated patient preferences for attributes of healthcare delivery and their willingness to pay for out-of-pocket costs. Results Patients ( n = 62) preferred to have a consultation, regardless of type, than no consultation at all. Patients preferred healthcare services with lower out-of-pocket costs, higher levels of perceived benefit and less time away from usual activities ( p < 0.008). Most patients preferred specialist care over in-person general practitioner care. Their order of preference to obtain specialist care was a videoconsultation into the patient’s local general practitioner practice or hospital ( p < 0.003), a videoconsultation into the home, and finally travelling for in-person appointment. Patients were willing to pay out-of-pocket costs for attributes they valued: to be seen by a specialist over videoconference ($129) and to reduce time away from usual activities ($160). Conclusion Patients value specialist care, lower out-of-pocket costs and less time away from usual activities. Telehealth is more likely than in-person care to cater to these preferences in many instances.

Download Full-text

Patient preferences for use of virtual consultations in an orthopaedic rehabilitation setting: Results from a discrete choice experiment

Journal of Health Services Research & Policy ◽

10.1177/13558196211035427 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 135581962110354

Author(s):

Anthony W Gilbert ◽

Emmanouil Mentzakis ◽

Carl R May ◽

Maria Stokes ◽

Jeremy Jones

Keyword(s):

Conceptual Model ◽

Discrete Choice Experiment ◽

Discrete Choice ◽

Patient Preferences ◽

Choice Experiment ◽

Best Practice ◽

Time Of Day ◽

Problem Area ◽

Fractional Factorial ◽

The Impact

Objective Virtual Consultations may reduce the need for face-to-face outpatient appointments, thereby potentially reducing the cost and time involved in delivering health care. This study reports a discrete choice experiment (DCE) that identifies factors that influence patient preferences for virtual consultations in an orthopaedic rehabilitation setting. Methods Previous research from the CONNECT (Care in Orthopaedics, burdeN of treatmeNt and the Effect of Communication Technology) Project and best practice guidance informed the development of our DCE. An efficient fractional factorial design with 16 choice scenarios was created that identified all main effects and partial two-way interactions. The design was divided into two blocks of eight scenarios each, to reduce the impact of cognitive fatigue. Data analysis were conducted using binary logit regression models. Results Sixty-one paired response sets (122 subjects) were available for analysis. DCE factors (whether the therapist is known to the patient, duration of appointment, time of day) and demographic factors (patient qualifications, access to equipment, difficulty with activities, multiple health issues, travel costs) were significant predictors of preference. We estimate that a patient is less than 1% likely to prefer a virtual consultation if the patient has a degree, is without access to the equipment and software to undertake a virtual consultation, does not have difficulties with day-to-day activities, is undergoing rehabilitation for one problem area, has to pay less than £5 to travel, is having a consultation with a therapist not known to them, in 1 weeks’ time, lasting 60 minutes, at 2 pm. We have developed a simple conceptual model to explain how these factors interact to inform preference, including patients’ access to resources, context for the consultation and the requirements of the consultation. Conclusions This conceptual model provides the framework to focus attention towards factors that might influence patient preference for virtual consultations. Our model can inform the development of future technologies, trials, and qualitative work to further explore the mechanisms that influence preference.

Download Full-text