Search

Background: In this study, we conducted an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to elicit the preferences of patients with age-related macular degeneration using identical attributes and levels.Objectives: To compare preference-based weights for age-related macular degeneration treatment attributes and levels generated by two elicitation methods. The properties of both methods were assessed, including ease of instrument use.Methods: A DCE and an AHP experiment were designed on the basis of five attributes. Preference-based weights were generated using the matrix multiplication method for attributes and levels in AHP and a mixed multinomial logit model for levels in the DCE. Attribute importance was further compared using coefficient (DCE) and weight (AHP) level ranges. The questionnaire difficulty was rated on a qualitative scale. Patients were asked to think aloud while providing their judgments.Results: AHP and DCE generated similar results regarding levels, stressing a preference for visual improvement, frequent monitoring, on-demand and less frequent injection schemes, approved drugs, and mild side effects. Attribute weights derived on the basis of level ranges led to a ranking that was opposite to the AHP directly calculated attribute weights. For example, visual function ranked first in the AHP and last on the basis of level ranges.Conclusions: The results across the methods were similar, with one exception: the directly measured AHP attribute weights were different from the level-based interpretation of attribute importance in both DCE and AHP. The dependence/independence of attribute importance on level ranges in DCE and AHP, respectively, should be taken into account when choosing a method to support decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of visual impairment and blindness in industrialized countries. Currently, mainly three treatment options are available, which are all intravitreal injections, but differ with regard to the frequency of injections needed, their approval status, and cost. This study aims to estimate patients' preferences for characteristics of treatment options for neovascular AMD. Methods: An interviewer-assisted discrete choice experiment was conducted among patients suffering from AMD treated with intravitreal injections. A Bayesian efficient design was used for the development of 12 choice tasks. In each task patients indicated their preference for one out of two treatment scenarios described by the attributes: side effects, approval status, effect on visual function, injection and monitoring frequency. While answering the choice tasks, patients were asked to think aloud and explain the reasons for choosing or rejecting specific characteristics. Quantitative data were analyzed with a mixed multinomial logit model. Results: Eighty-six patients completed the questionnaire. Patients significantly preferred treatments that improve visual function, are approved, are administered in a pro re nata regimen (as needed), and are accompanied by bimonthly monitoring. Patients significantly disliked less frequent monitoring visits (every 4 months) and explained this was due to fear of deterioration being left unnoticed, and in turn experiencing disease deterioration. Significant preference heterogeneity was found for all levels except for bimonthly monitoring visits and severe, rare eye-related side effects. Patients gave clear explanations of their individual preferences during the interviews. Conclusion: Significant preference trends were discernible for the overall sample, despite the preference heterogeneity for most treatment characteristics. Patients like to be monitored and treated regularly, but not too frequently or infrequently. The results of our qualitative research facilitated the interpretation of the quantitative data collected in this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]