IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Patient preferences for managing asthma: results from a discrete choice experiment

  • Madeleine T. King

    (Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE), University of Technology Sydney (UTS), Australia)

  • Jane Hall

    (Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE), University of Technology Sydney (UTS), Australia)

  • Emily Lancsar

    (Business School (Economics) and Centre for Health Service Research, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK)

  • Denzil Fiebig
  • Ishrat Hossain

    (Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE), University of Technology Sydney (UTS), Australia)

  • Jordan Louviere
  • Helen K. Reddel
  • Christine R. Jenkins

Effective control of asthma requires regular preventive medication. Poor medication adherence suggests that patient preferences for medications may differ from the concerns of the prescribing clinicians. This study investigated patient preferences for preventive medications across symptom control, daily activities, medication side-effects, convenience and costs, using a discrete choice experiment embedded in a randomized clinical trial involving patients with mild-moderate persistent asthma. The present data were collected after patients had received 6 weeks' treatment with one of two drugs. Three choice options were presented, to continue with the current drug, to change to an alternative, hypothetical drug, or to take no preventive medication. Analysis used random parameter multinomial logit. Most respondents chose to continue with their current drug in most choice situations but this tendency differed depending on which medication they had been allocated. Respondents valued their ability to participate in usual daily activities and sport, preferred minimal symptoms, and were less likely to choose drugs with side-effects. Cost was also significant, but other convenience attributes were not. Demographic characteristics did not improve the model fit. This study illustrates how discrete choice experiments may be embedded in a clinical trial to provide insights into patient preferences. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/hec.1193
File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Health Economics.

Volume (Year): 16 (2007)
Issue (Month): 7 ()
Pages: 703-717

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:16:y:2007:i:7:p:703-717
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. G. Salkeld & M. Ryan & L. Short, 2000. "The veil of experience: do consumers prefer what they know best?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(3), pages 267-270.
  2. Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1998. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 109-129, November.
  3. 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.
  4. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521788304 is not listed on IDEAS
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:16:y:2007:i:7:p:703-717. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)

or (Christopher F. Baum)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.