Patient Preferences for Pharmaceutical and Device-Based Treatments for Uncontrolled Hypertension: Discrete Choice Experiment

Author:

Kandzari David E.1ORCID,Weber Michael A.2ORCID,Poulos Christine3,Coulter Joshua4ORCID,Cohen Sidney A.5ORCID,DeBruin Vanessa5,Jones Denise5,Pathak Atul67

Affiliation:

1. Piedmont Heart Institute, Atlanta, GA (D.E.K.).

2. SUNY Downstate College of Medicine, Brooklyn, NY (M.A.W.).

3. RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC (C.P.).

4. RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, (J.C.).

5. Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA (S.A.C., V.D.B., D.J.).

6. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Princese Grace, Monaco (A.P.).

7. UMR UT CNRS 88 Hypertension and Heart Failure: molecular and clinical investigations. Toulouse, France, INI-CRCT F-CRIN, GREAT Networks (A.P.).

Abstract

Background: Discrete choice experiment is a survey method used to understand how individuals make decisions and to quantify the relative importance of features. Using discrete choice experiment methods, we quantified patient benefit–risk preferences for hypertension treatments, including pharmaceutical and interventional treatments, like renal denervation. Methods: Respondents from the United States with physician-confirmed uncontrolled hypertension selected between treatments involving a procedure or pills, using a structured survey. Treatment features included interventional, noninterventional, or no hypertension treatment; number of daily blood pressure (BP) pills; expected reduction in office systolic BP; duration of effect; and risks of drug side effects, access site pain, or vascular injury. The results of a random–parameters logit model were used to estimate the importance of each treatment attribute. Results: Among 400 patients completing the survey between 2020 and 2021, demographics included: 52% women, mean age 59.2±13.0 years, systolic BP 155.1±12.3 mm Hg, and 1.8±0.9 prescribed antihypertensive medications. Reduction in office systolic BP was the most important treatment attribute. The remaining attributes, in decreasing order, were duration of effect, whether treatment was interventional, number of daily pills, risk of vascular injury, and risk of drug side effects. Risk of access site pain did not influence choice. In general, respondents preferred noninterventional over interventional treatments, yet only a 2.3 mm Hg reduction in office systolic BP was required to offset this preference. Small reductions in office systolic BP would offset risks of vascular injury or drug side effects. At least a 20% risk of vascular injury or drug side effects would be tolerated in exchange for improved BP. Conclusions: Reduction in systolic BP was identified as the most important driver of patient treatment preference, while treatment-related risks had less influence. The results indicate that respondents would accept interventional treatments in exchange for modest reductions in systolic BP compared with those observed in renal denervation trials.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cited by 6 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Diagnosis and management of resistant hypertension;BMJ;2024-06-19

2. The Ongoing Odyssey of Renal Denervation;Journal of the American College of Cardiology;2023-11

3. Renal Denervation for Treatment of Hypertension: From High-Level Quality Evidence to Implementation in Clinical Practice;Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions;2023-11

4. SCAI Position Statement on Renal Denervation for Hypertension: Patient Selection, Operator Competence, Training and Techniques, and Organizational Recommendations;Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions;2023-11

5. One More Step in the Renal Denervation Trek;American Journal of Nephrology;2023-08-31

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3