The provision of health care to patients with haemophilia through replacement of the deficient coagulation factor is the result of a complex interaction between patients, physicians and policy makers, each carrying their individual sets of preferences. Preferences of patients, physicians and pharmacists towards perceived viral safety, risk of inhibitor development, infusion frequency during prophylaxis, pharmaceutical dosage form, distribution modes and price were evaluated by conjoint analysis, using a discrete choice experiment. Overall 178 patients', 69 physicians and 58 pharmacists completed the study. Patients, physicians and pharmacists displayed preferences: (i) similar in direction and strength for risk of inhibitors and frequency of prophylaxis, (ii) similar in direction, but not in strength for perceived viral safety and price, with patients showing lower strength compared with physicians and pharmacists, and (iii) dissimilar in direction and/or strength for: (i) dosage form, which tested important only for pharmacists and (ii) distribution mode, which tested important for patients and physicians only. Our study provides evidence of the differences between different stakeholders in the preferences towards haemophilia replacement therapy, indicating that different opinions should be taken into account when planning optimal care. © 2005 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Mantovani, L., Monzini, M., Mannucci, P., Scalone, L., Villa, M., & Gringeri, A. (2005). Differences between patients', physicians' and pharmacists' preferences for treatment products in haemophilia: A discrete choice experiment. HAEMOPHILIA, 11(6), 589-597 [10.1111/j.1365-2516.2005.01159.x].

Differences between patients', physicians' and pharmacists' preferences for treatment products in haemophilia: A discrete choice experiment

Mantovani LG
Primo
;
Scalone L;
2005

Abstract

The provision of health care to patients with haemophilia through replacement of the deficient coagulation factor is the result of a complex interaction between patients, physicians and policy makers, each carrying their individual sets of preferences. Preferences of patients, physicians and pharmacists towards perceived viral safety, risk of inhibitor development, infusion frequency during prophylaxis, pharmaceutical dosage form, distribution modes and price were evaluated by conjoint analysis, using a discrete choice experiment. Overall 178 patients', 69 physicians and 58 pharmacists completed the study. Patients, physicians and pharmacists displayed preferences: (i) similar in direction and strength for risk of inhibitors and frequency of prophylaxis, (ii) similar in direction, but not in strength for perceived viral safety and price, with patients showing lower strength compared with physicians and pharmacists, and (iii) dissimilar in direction and/or strength for: (i) dosage form, which tested important only for pharmacists and (ii) distribution mode, which tested important for patients and physicians only. Our study provides evidence of the differences between different stakeholders in the preferences towards haemophilia replacement therapy, indicating that different opinions should be taken into account when planning optimal care. © 2005 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Articolo in rivista - Articolo scientifico
Coagulation factor concentrates; Conjoint analysis; Discrete choice experiment; Haemophilia; Inhibitor; Preferences
English
589
597
9
Mantovani, L., Monzini, M., Mannucci, P., Scalone, L., Villa, M., & Gringeri, A. (2005). Differences between patients', physicians' and pharmacists' preferences for treatment products in haemophilia: A discrete choice experiment. HAEMOPHILIA, 11(6), 589-597 [10.1111/j.1365-2516.2005.01159.x].
Mantovani, L; Monzini, M; Mannucci, P; Scalone, L; Villa, M; Gringeri, A
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10281/282183
Citazioni
  • Scopus 49
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 46
Social impact