Dataset Information

Treatment preferences for medication or surgery in patients with deep endometriosis and bowel involvement - a discrete choice experiment.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To study the preferences of women with deep endometriosis (DE) with bowel involvement when they have to choose between conservative (medication) or surgical treatment.

Design

Labelled discrete choice experiment (DCE).

Setting

Dutch academic and non-academic hospitals and online recruitment.

Population or sample

A total of 169 women diagnosed with DE of the bowel.

Methods

Baseline characteristics and the fear of surgery were collected. Women were asked to rank attributes and choose between hypothetical conservative or surgical treatment in different choice sets (scenarios). Each choice set offered different levels of all treatment attributes. Data were analysed by using multinomial logistic regression.

Main outcome measures

The following attributes - effect on/risk of pain, fatigue, pregnancy, endometriosis lesions, mood swings, osteoporosis, temporary stoma and permanent intestinal symptoms - were used in this DCE.

Results

In the ranking, osteoporosis was ranked with low importance, whereas in the DCE, a lower chance of osteoporosis was one of the most important drivers when choosing a conservative treatment. Women with previous surgery showed less fear of surgery compared with women without surgery. Low anterior resection syndrome was almost equally important for patients as the chance of pain reduction. Pain reduction had higher importance than improving fertility chances, even in women with desire for a future child.

Conclusions

The risk of developing low anterior resection syndrome as a result of treatment is almost equally important as the reduction of pain symptoms. Women with previous surgery experience less fear of surgery compared with women without a surgical history.

Tweetable abstract

First discrete choice experiment in patients with deep endometriosis.

SUBMITTER: Metzemaekers J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9302663 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe aim of this study was to investigate patients' preferences regarding the evolving treatment landscape in Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) based on a discrete choice experiment.MethodsEligible patients (aged 18 years or older) had a confirmed diagnosis of CD or UC and were willing and able to participate in telephone interviews. The survey design is based on a prior literature review, a pilot study, and clinical expert discussions. Preferences related to clinical and practical features of advanced therapies, like tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors, anti-integrins, anti-interleukins, and Janus kinase inhibitors, were assessed. Patients were asked to choose between two different hypothetical treatment alternatives visualized in up to 11 choice scenarios. Based on these choices, the relative importance of treatment characteristics was derived from regression coefficients estimated by a conditional logit model.ResultsOf the 291 patients included, 219 (75%) were eligible for this analysis. Among the evaluated attributes in CD, 1-year remission rate was ranked highest, with 42.3% relevance for the overall decision. The second most important attribute was the frequency of serious adverse events (AE) (25.1%), followed by sustained remission over 2 years (17.8%). Lower importance was assigned to the administration mode (14.6%) and none to the frequency of non-serious AE (0.1%). In UC, preferences were driven by efficacy (25.3% for mucosal healing; 23.4% for corticosteroid-free remission) and the frequency of serious AE (18.3%), followed by the administration mode (18.1%). Also, non-serious AE were classified as relevant factors for decision-making (10.7%), while maintaining remission for at least 2 years showed no significant impact (4.4%).ConclusionFor both indications, efficacy outcomes were rated most important, followed by the frequency of serious AE. Variations were mainly found in the evaluation of non-serious AE and sustained remission. Considering patient preferences may improve the effectiveness of available therapies for moderate to severe CD and UC.

Project description:ImportanceSurgical options for weight loss vary considerably in risks and benefits, but the relative importance of procedure-associated characteristics in patient decision making is largely unknown.ObjectiveTo identify patient preferences for risks, benefits, and other attributes of treatment options available to individuals who are candidates for bariatric surgery.Design, setting, and participantsThis discrete choice experiment of weight loss procedures was performed as an internet-based survey administered to patients recruited from bariatric surgery information sessions in the State of Michigan. Each procedure was described by the following set of attributes: (1) treatment method, (2) recovery and reversibility, (3) time that treatment has been available, (4) expected weight loss, (5) effect on other medical conditions, (6) risk of complication, (7) adverse effects, (8) changes to diet, and (9) out-of-pocket costs. Participants chose between surgical profiles by comparing attributes. Survey data were collected from May 1, 2015, through January 30, 2016, and analyzed from February 1 to June 30, 2016.Main outcomes and measuresEstimated relative value of risks and benefits for leading weight-loss surgical options and marginal willingness to pay for procedure attributes. A latent class analysis identified respondent subgroups.ResultsAmong the 815 respondents (79.9% women; mean [SD] age, 44.5 [12.0] years), profiles of hypothetical procedures that included resolution of medical conditions (coefficient for full resolution, 0.229 [95% CI, 0.177 to 0.280; P < .001]; coefficient for no resolution, -0.207 [95% CI, -0.254 to -0.159; P < .001]), higher total weight loss (coefficient for each additional 20% loss, 0.185 [95% CI, 0.166 to 0.205; P < .001]), and lower out-of-pocket costs (coefficient for each additional $1000, -0.034 [95% CI, -0.042 to -0.025; P < .001]) were most likely to be selected. Younger respondents were more likely than older respondents to choose treatments with higher weight loss (coefficient for loss of 80% excess weight 0.543 [95% CI, 0.435-0.651] vs 0.397 [95% CI, 0.315-0.482]) and were more sensitive to out-of-pocket costs (coefficient for $100 out-of-pocket costs, 0.346 [95% CI, 0.221-0.470] vs 0.262 [95% CI, 0.174 to 0.350]; coefficient for $15 000 in out-of-pocket costs, -0.768 [95% CI, -0.938 to -0.598] vs -0.384 [95% CI, -0.500 to -0.268]). Marginal willingness to pay indicated respondents would pay $5470 for losing each additional 20% of excess body weight and $12 843 for resolution of existing medical conditions, the most desired procedure attributes. Latent class analysis identified the following 3 unobserved subgroups: cost-sensitive (most concerned with costs); benefit-focused (most concerned with excess weight loss and resolution of medical conditions); and procedure-focused (most concerned with how the treatment itself worked, including recovery and reversibility).Conclusions and relevanceCandidates for bariatric surgery identified costs, expected weight loss, and resolution of medical conditions as the most important characteristics of weight loss surgery decisions. Other information, such as risk of complications and adverse effects, were important to patients but less so.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:It is desirable that public preferences are established and incorporated in emergency healthcare reforms. The aim of this study was to investigate preferences for local versus centralised provision of all emergency medical services (EMS) and explore what individuals think are important considerations for EMS delivery. DESIGN:A discrete choice experiment was conducted. The attributes used in the choice scenarios were: travel time to the hospital, waiting time to be seen, length of stay in the hospital, risks of dying, readmission and opportunity for outpatient care after emergency treatment at a local hospital. SETTING:North East England. PARTICIPANTS:Participants were a randomly sampled general population, aged 16 years or above recruited from Healthwatch Northumberland network database of lay members and from clinical contact with Northumbria Healthcare National Health Service Foundation Trust via Patient Experience Team. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Analysis used logistic regression modelling techniques to determine the preference of each attribute. Marginal rates of substitution between attributes were estimated to understand the trade-offs individuals were willing to make. RESULTS:Responses were obtained from 148 people (62 completed a web and 86 a postal version). Respondents preferred shorter travel time to hospital, shorter waiting time, fewer number of days in hospital, low risk of death, low risk of readmission and outpatient follow-up care in their local hospital. However, individuals were willing to trade off increased travel time and waiting time for high-quality centralised care. Individuals were willing to travel 9 min more for a 1-day reduction in length of stay in the hospital, 38 min for a 1% reduction in risk of death and 112 min for having outpatient follow-up care at their local hospital. CONCLUSIONS:People value centralised EMS if it provides higher quality care and are willing to travel further and wait longer.

Project description:Choosing hypodontia treatment requires young people and parents to consider a large amount of information, identify what is important to them, and make trade-offs between options. This study aimed to examine young people and parents' preferences for hypodontia treatment using discrete choice experiment (DCE). This was a cross-sectional survey of young people (12-16 y) with hypodontia of any severity, at any stage of treatment, and their parents. Participants were recruited from NHS Hospitals in England and Wales. A bespoke DCE questionnaire was developed to measure preferences for 6 attributes of hypodontia treatment (waiting time, treatment time, problems during treatment, discomfort during treatment, bite, appearance). The questionnaire was completed 1) online by young people and parents, individually or together, and 2) by child-parent dyads under observation. Preferences were analyzed using regression models. In total, 204 participants (122 young people, 56 parents, 26 dyads) completed the online questionnaire and 15 child-parent dyads completed the questionnaire under observation. The most important attribute in hypodontia treatment was improvement in appearance, but significant heterogeneity was found in preferences. Four distinct groups of participants were found: group 1 (39%): severe discomfort and problems were most important; group 2 (31%): most concerned about improvement in appearance of teeth and improvement in bite; group 3 (22%): appearance 3 times more important than any other attribute; and group 4 (9%): preferences difficult to interpret. There was variation in how child-parent dyads approached decision-making, with some negotiating joint preferences, while for others, one individual dominated. Making trade-offs in DCE tasks helped some people think about treatment and identify their preferences. Appearance is an important outcome from hypodontia treatment, but preferences vary and potential risks and functional outcome are also important to some people. There is a notable level of uncertainty in decision-making, which suggests further shared decision support would be valuable.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Guidelines underline the role of individual preferences in the selection of a screening test, as insufficient evidence is available to recommend one screening test over another. We conducted a study to determine the preferences of individuals and to predict uptake for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes using various screening tests. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) questionnaire was distributed among naive subjects, yet to be screened, and previously screened subjects, aged 50-75 years. Subjects were asked to choose between scenarios on the basis of faecal occult blood test (FOBT), flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), total colonoscopy (TC) with various test-specific screening intervals and mortality reductions, and no screening (opt-out). RESULTS: In total, 489 out of 1498 (33%) screening-naïve subjects (52% male; mean age+/-s.d. 61+/-7 years) and 545 out of 769 (71%) previously screened subjects (52% male; mean age+/-s.d. 61+/-6 years) returned the questionnaire. The type of screening test, screening interval, and risk reduction of CRC-related mortality influenced subjects' preferences (all P<0.05). Screening-naive and previously screened subjects equally preferred 5-yearly FS and 10-yearly TC (P=0.24; P=0.11), but favoured both strategies to annual FOBT screening (all P-values <0.001) if, based on the literature, realistic risk reduction of CRC-related mortality was applied. Screening-naive and previously screened subjects were willing to undergo a 10-yearly TC instead of a 5-yearly FS to obtain an additional risk reduction of CRC-related mortality of 45% (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: These data provide insight into the extent by which interval and risk reduction of CRC-related mortality affect preferences for CRC screening tests. Assuming realistic test characteristics, subjects in the target population preferred endoscopic screening over FOBT screening, partly, due to the more favourable risk reduction of CRC-related mortality by endoscopy screening. Increasing the knowledge of potential screenees regarding risk reduction by different screening strategies is, therefore, warranted to prevent unrealistic expectations and to optimise informed choice.

Project description:ObjectivesCT colonography (CTC) may be an acceptable test for colorectal cancer screening but bowel preparation can be a barrier to uptake. This study tested the hypothesis that prospective screening invitees would prefer full-laxative preparation with higher sensitivity and specificity for polyps, despite greater burden, over less burdensome reduced-laxative or non-laxative alternatives with lower sensitivity and specificity.DesignDiscrete choice experiment.SettingOnline, web-based survey.Participants2819 adults (45-54 years) from the UK responded to an online invitation to take part in a cancer screening study. Quota sampling ensured that the sample reflected key demographics of the target population and had no relevant bowel disease or medical qualifications. The analysis comprised 607 participants.InterventionsAfter receiving information about screening and CTC, participants completed 3-4 choice scenarios. Scenarios showed two hypothetical forms of CTC with different permutations of three attributes: preparation, sensitivity and specificity for polyps.Primary outcome measuresParticipants considered the trade-offs in each scenario and stated their preferred test (or chose neither).ResultsPreparation and sensitivity for polyps were both significant predictors of preferences (coefficients: -3.834 to -6.346 for preparation, 0.207-0.257 for sensitivity; p<0.0005). These attributes predicted preferences to a similar extent. Realistic specificity values were non-significant (-0.002 to 0.025; p=0.953). Contrary to our hypothesis, probabilities of selecting tests were similar for realistic forms of full-laxative, reduced-laxative and non-laxative preparations (0.362-0.421). However, they were substantially higher for hypothetical improved forms of reduced-laxative or non-laxative preparations with better sensitivity for polyps (0.584-0.837).ConclusionsUptake of CTC following non-laxative or reduced-laxative preparations is unlikely to be greater than following full-laxative preparation as perceived gains from reduced burden may be diminished by reduced sensitivity. However, both attributes are important so a more sensitive form of reduced-laxative or non-laxative preparation might improve uptake substantially.