IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v4y2011i1p45-54.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient Preferences for Treatment of Achilles Tendon Pain

Author

Listed:
  • Kent Sweeting
  • Jennifer Whitty
  • Paul Scuffham
  • Michael Yelland

Abstract

Background: Discrete-choice experiments are based on the premise that any good or service can be described by its characteristics (or attributes), and the extent to which an individual values a good or service depends on the levels of these characteristics. Little is known about patient preferences for treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain such as Achilles tendinopathy. Methods: A discrete-choice experiment was conducted in 58 adults with a history of Achilles tendon pain at the conclusion of a three-arm randomized clinical trial. Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire consisting of ten hypothetical treatment scenarios and some sociodemographic questions. For each scenario, participants were asked to choose which option they would prefer if seeking treatment for their painful Achilles tendon. A mixed logit model was estimated to quantify subject preferences and marginal willingness to pay for the treatment attributes. Results: A response rate of 62% was achieved. A significant positive impact on utility was observed for chance of treatment success. A significant negative impact on utility was observed for cost, weeks before exercise can be completed free of pain, chance of side effects (p=0.06), and injections as a stand-alone treatment. Respondents were willing to pay Australian dollars ($A)238 (95% CI -312, 788) for a 10% increase in the chance of treatment success. Conclusions: Study participants with Achilles tendon pain who had either participated or expressed an interest in participating in a randomized trial prefer a treatment that costs less, has a greater chance of success, has a shorter duration before being able to exercise free of pain, and has less likelihood of side effects. On average, participants preferred exercises over injections as a stand-alone treatment. Further research is required to confirm the findings in patients outside of the trial setting. Nevertheless, this study contributes to an area that is deficient in research by identifying priorities and marginal willingness to pay for attributes related to Achilles tendinopathy. Copyright Adis Data Information BV 2011

Suggested Citation

  • Kent Sweeting & Jennifer Whitty & Paul Scuffham & Michael Yelland, 2011. "Patient Preferences for Treatment of Achilles Tendon Pain," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 4(1), pages 45-54, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:4:y:2011:i:1:p:45-54
    DOI: 10.2165/11532830-000000000-00000
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/11532830-000000000-00000
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/11532830-000000000-00000?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chiou, Lesley & Walker, Joan L., 2007. "Masking identification of discrete choice models under simulation methods," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 141(2), pages 683-703, December.
    2. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
    3. Kjaer, Trine & Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte, 2008. "Preference heterogeneity and choice of cardiac rehabilitation program: Results from a discrete choice experiment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 124-132, January.
    4. Andrew M. Jones (ed.), 2006. "The Elgar Companion to Health Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3572.
    5. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    6. Madeleine T. King & Jane Hall & Emily Lancsar & Denzil Fiebig & Ishrat Hossain & Jordan Louviere & Helen K. Reddel & Christine R. Jenkins, 2007. "Patient preferences for managing asthma: results from a discrete choice experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(7), pages 703-717, July.
    7. Hall, Jane & Fiebig, Denzil G. & King, Madeleine T. & Hossain, Ishrat & Louviere, Jordan J., 2006. "What influences participation in genetic carrier testing?: Results from a discrete choice experiment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 520-537, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Li-Chia Chen & Li-Jen Cheng & Yan Zhang & Xin He & Roger D Knaggs, 2015. "Acupuncture or Low Frequency Infrared Treatment for Low Back Pain in Chinese Patients: A Discrete Choice Experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, May.
    2. Mylene Lagarde & Nonglak Pagaiya & Viroj Tangcharoensathian & Duane Blaauw, 2013. "One Size Does Not Fit All: Investigating Doctors' Stated Preference Heterogeneity For Job Incentives To Inform Policy In Thailand," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(12), pages 1452-1469, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Emily Lancsar & Denzil G. Fiebig & Arne Risa Hole, 2017. "Discrete Choice Experiments: A Guide to Model Specification, Estimation and Software," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(7), pages 697-716, July.
    2. Emily Lancsar & Peter Burge, 2014. "Choice modelling research in health economics," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 28, pages 675-687, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Emily Lancsar & Jordan Louviere, 2008. "Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(8), pages 661-677, August.
    4. Paul Scuffham & Jennifer Whitty & Matthew Taylor & Ruth Saxby, 2010. "Health system choice," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 89-97, March.
    5. Fiebig, Denzil G. & Haas, Marion & Hossain, Ishrat & Street, Deborah J. & Viney, Rosalie, 2009. "Decisions about Pap tests: What influences women and providers?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 1766-1774, May.
    6. Jennifer Whitty & Paul Scuffham & Sharyn Rundle-Thielee, 2011. "Public and decision maker stated preferences for pharmaceutical subsidy decisions," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 73-79, March.
    7. Alessandro Mengoni & Chiara Seghieri & Sabina Nuti, 2013. "The application of discrete choice experiments in health economics: a systematic review of the literature," Working Papers 201301, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna of Pisa, Istituto di Management.
    8. Joan L. Walker & Moshe Ben-Akiva & Denis Bolduc, 2007. "Identification of parameters in normal error component logit-mixture (NECLM) models," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(6), pages 1095-1125.
    9. Leonie Burgess & Deborah J. Street & Rosalie Viney & Jordan Louviere, 2012. "Design of Choice Experiments in Health Economics," Chapters, in: Andrew M. Jones (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Health Economics, Second Edition, chapter 42, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Waleska Sigüernza & Petr Mariel, 2013. "Valoración económica de los servicios sanitarios en la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 207(4), pages 71-99, December.
    11. Madeleine King & Rosalie Viney & Ishrat Hossain & David Smith & Sandra Fowler & Elizabeth Savage & Bruce Armstrong, 2006. "Men?s preferences for treatment of early stage prostate cancer: Results from a discrete choice experiment, CHERE Working Paper 2006/14," Working Papers 2006/14, CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney.
    12. V. Meusel & E. Mentzakis & P. Baji & G. Fiorentini & F. Paolucci, 2023. "Priority setting in the German healthcare system: results from a discrete choice experiment," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 411-431, September.
    13. Robert W. Paterson & Kevin J. Boyle & Christopher F. Parmeter & James E. Neumann & Paul De Civita, 2008. "Heterogeneity in preferences for smoking cessation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(12), pages 1363-1377, December.
    14. Jesús Clemente López & Pedro García Castrillo & María A. González Alvarez & Marcos Sanso Frago, 2014. "Una evaluación de la efectividad de la formación ocupacional para desempleados antes y después de la crisis económica: el caso de Aragón," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 208(1), pages 77-106, March.
    15. Hole, Arne Risa, 2008. "Modelling heterogeneity in patients' preferences for the attributes of a general practitioner appointment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 1078-1094, July.
    16. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    17. Walters, Gabby & Magor, Thomas & Kelly, Sarah & Wallin, Ann, 2022. "Cruising through a pandemic: Or not?," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    18. Clark, Andrew E. & Senik, Claudia & Yamada, Katsunori, 2017. "When experienced and decision utility concur: The case of income comparisons," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1-9.
    19. Bhat, Chandra R. & Sardesai, Rupali, 2006. "The impact of stop-making and travel time reliability on commute mode choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 709-730, November.
    20. Cao, Ying (Jessica) & Cranfield, John & Chen, Chen & Widowski, Tina, 2021. "Heterogeneous informational and attitudinal impacts on consumer preferences for eggs from welfare enhanced cage systems," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:4:y:2011:i:1:p:45-54. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.