Understanding Patient Preferences in Medication Nonadherence: A Review of Stated Preference Data

Patient Preferences in the Treatment of Moderate-to-severe Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis is a chronic, inflammatory skin disease. A variety of systemic treatments are available for patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. The efficacy, safety and administration profile of these treatments vary, and determining the optimal treatment strategy may require weighing the benefits and drawbacks of therapies with diverse characteristics. This study used an online discrete choice experiment survey to investigate treatment preferences among adults with atopic dermatitis from Denmark, France, the UK, or Canada. Participants were identified through existing online panels. The survey included questions regarding different treatment attributes, defined based on currently approved treatments for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. Treatment preferences were measured as the relative importance of different treatment attributes. A total of 713 respondents met the inclusion criteria and completed the survey. The discrete choice experiment identified a significant preference for avoiding the risk of severe adverse events, and for oral pill every day compared with biweekly injections. The time to full effect was not rated as being important. These findings suggest that patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis prioritize safety as most important, followed by ease of administration in their treatment preferences, while time to full effect and monitoring requirements were the least important attributes.

Smart About Meds (SAM): a pilot randomized controlled trial of a mobile application to improve medication adherence following hospital discharge

Objective

The objectives of this pilot study were (1) to assess the feasibility of a larger evaluation of Smart About Meds (SAM), a patient-centered medication management mobile application, and (2) to evaluate SAM’s potential to improve outcomes of interest, including adherence to medication changes made at hospital discharge and the occurrence of adverse events.

Materials and Methods

We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial among patients discharged from internal medicine units of an academic health center between June 2019 and March 2020. Block randomization was used to randomize patients to intervention (received access to SAM at discharge) or control (received usual care). Patients were followed for 30 days post-discharge, during which app use was recorded. Pharmacy claims data were used to measure adherence to medication changes made at discharge, and physician billing data were used to identify emergency department visits and hospital readmissions during follow-up.

Results

Forty-nine patients were eligible for inclusion in the study at hospital discharge (23 intervention, 26 control). In the 30 days of post-discharge, 15 (65.2%) intervention patients used the SAM app. During this period, intervention patients adhered to a larger proportion of medication changes (83.7%) than control patients (77.8%), including newly prescribed medications (72.7% vs 61.7%) and dose changes (90.9% vs 81.8%). A smaller proportion of intervention patients (8.7%) were readmitted to hospital during follow-up than control patients (15.4%).

Conclusion

The high uptake of SAM among intervention patients supports the feasibility of a larger trial. Results also suggest that SAM has the potential to enhance adherence to medication changes and reduce the risk of downstream adverse events. This hypothesis needs to be tested in a larger trial.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov, registration number NCT04676165.

Association between medication adherence and cardiovascular outcomes among acute coronary syndrome patients

BACKGROUND

Medication adherence to guideline-recommended therapy is important and associated with a lower rate of death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective study aimed to evaluate medication adherence in four classes of guideline-recommended medicines (antiplatelets, ACEIs/ARBs, beta-blockers, and statins) among patients discharged with ACS and to assess the association between patients' adherence to each medication and the occurrence of MACE including all causes of death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, heart failure, stroke, atrial fibrillation or coronary revascularization.

METHODS

The electronic medical records of patients with ACS admitted at a tertiary teaching hospital in northern Thailand between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2015 were reviewed. Medication adherence was evaluated from a hospital database of prescription refills using the medication gap technique with ≥90% as a cut-off for full adherence and <90% as partial adherence.

RESULTS

Of 256 patients, the mean age was 65.9 (±13.0) years. The median percentage of medication adherence in the dual antiplatelet group, ACEI/ARB group, beta-blocker group, and statin group were 94.7, 93.6, 93.1, and 93.1%, respectively. Sixty-two patients (24.2%) experienced MACE after a median follow-up of 1.5 years. Patients with ≥90% adherence of beta-blockers had a significantly lower risk of MACE than those with <90% adherence: HR = 0.47, 95% Cl, 0.26-0.87, p = 0.016, adjusted with potential confounders. No other significant associations were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Medication adherence of each medication was above 90%. ACS patients with at least 90% adherence to beta-blockers had a lower risk of MACE than those having less than 90% adherence, but no other significant associations were found for other medications.

Ranking facilitators and barriers of medication adherence by patients with inflammatory arthritis: a maximum difference scaling exercise

Introduction

Facilitators and barriers of adherence to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have been identified by patients with inflammatory arthritis earlier. However, the relative importance from the patients’ perspective of these factors is unknown. Knowledge on this ranking might guide the development of interventions and may facilitate targeted communication on adherence. This study aims to examine 1) the relative importance patients attach to facilitators and barriers for DMARDs adherence, and 2) the relationship between patient characteristics and ranking of these factors.

Methods

One hundred twenty-eight outpatients with inflammatory arthritis; (60% female, mean age 62 years (SD = 12), median disease duration 15 years, IQR (7, 23) participated in a Maximum Difference scaling exercise and ranked 35 items based upon previously identified facilitators and barriers to medication adherence. Hierarchical Bayes estimation was used to compute mean Rescaled Probability Scores (RPS; 0–100) (i.e. relative importance score). Kendall’s coefficient of concordance was used to examine a possible association between patients’ characteristics (i.e. age, sex and educational level) and ranking of the items.

Results

The three most important items ranked by patients were: Reduction of symptoms formulated as “Arthritis medications help to reduce my symptoms” (RPS = 7.30, CI 7.17–7.44), maintaining independence formulated as “I can maintain my independence as much as possible” (RPS = 6.76, CI 6.54–6.97) and Shared decision making formulated as “I can decide –together with my physician- about my arthritis medications” (RPS = 6.48, CI 6.24–6.72). No associations between patient characteristics and ranking of factors were found.

Conclusions

Reducing symptoms, maintaining independency and shared decision making are patients’ most important factors for DMARDs adherence. This knowledge might guide the development of interventions and may facilitate communication between health professionals and their patients on medication adherence.

Spinal cord injury and polypharmacy: a scoping review

Purpose: The purpose of this scoping review was to map the scope of the literature on polypharmacy among individuals with spinal cord injury or dysfunction (SCI/D).Material and methods: Five electronic databases were searched for literature published between January 1990 and July 2018. The following keywords were searched using Boolean operators, wild cards, proximity operators and truncations: spinal cord injuries, multiple medications, polypharmacy. The initial search identified 1,459 articles; 1,098 remained after deduplication. Following the title and abstract screen, 81 full-texts were reviewed, and 18 met all of the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the review.Results: Of the 18 studies identified, less than half defined polypharmacy. Definitions varied in the types and number of medications. Older age, higher level of injury and greater severity of injury were factors related to polypharmacy. Negative clinical outcomes, such as drug-related problems and bowel complications were identified.Conclusions: This scoping review identified a paucity of research on polypharmacy post-SCI/D, highlighting a need for future research. To improve the state of knowledge, there is a need to better understand factors and clinical outcomes related to polypharmacy in persons with SCI/D and to explore experiences of persons with SCI/D, caregivers and clinicians relating to polypharmacy.Implications for rehabilitationPrescribers should be aware of the factors and negative clinical outcomes related to polypharmacy and spinal cord injuries/dysfunction, especially for patients with higher level and more severe injuries.Prescribers should work with their patients with spinal cord injuries/dysfunction to avoid inappropriate polypharmacy and to integrate appropriate alternatives to medications.Optimizing medication management should be a significant focus of spinal cord injury/dysfunction rehabilitation and research in order to develop targeted interventions that improve patient outcomes.

Measuring preferences for CYP2C19 genotyping in patients with acute coronary syndrome - a discrete choice experiment

Aim: To evaluate the relative importance of CYP2C19 genotype-guided treatment attributes to patients. Patients & methods: A discrete choice experiment questionnaire was administered to 63 patients with acute coronary syndrome. Attributes examined in the discrete choice experiment questionnaire were: cost of genetic testing (S$50, S$100, S$200); cost of antiplatelet medication (S$100, S$500, S$1000); heart attack or stroke risk (5 in 100, 15 in 100, 25 in 100); bleeding risk (5 in 100, 15 in 100, 25 in 100); doctor's recommendation (yes, neutral). Mixed logit model was used for analysis. Results & conclusion: All attributes were important in patients' decision-making. Most displayed strong preference for doctor's recommendation and reduced heart attack or stroke risk. Genotyping was chosen by 63.5% of the patients.

Patient Preferences for Biologic and Biosimilar Osteoporosis Treatments in Colombia

PURPOSE

Teriparatide is used to treat patients with established osteoporosis but is often reserved for patients who have inadequate response to antiresorptive therapy. Biosimilar teriparatide, which is believed to have efficacy and safety similar to the originator product, is now available in Colombia. However, little is known about patients' preferences for originator biologic and biosimilar treatments. Our objective was to quantify the relative importance that patients in Colombia place on features of injectable osteoporosis treatments including whether the treatment is an originator biologic or a biosimilar.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to elicit preferences of patients with osteoporosis treatment devices in Colombia. The survey was completed by 200 respondents at high risk of fracture, with or without teriparatide experience. Each treatment alternative within the DCE was characterized by five attributes: type of medicine (originator biologic, biosimilar), needle length, angle of injection, how to measure the medicine dose, and how long the medicine can be left unrefrigerated. A random parameters logit regression was used to estimate preferences and conditional relative attribute importance, while controlling for preference heterogeneity.

RESULTS

A total of 200 patients (mean age = 58.3 years) completed the survey. Most were female (84.5%) and married (54.5%); 50.5% had secondary education or less, 21% had current teriparatide exposure. The attribute with the highest conditional relative importance estimate (standard error) was biologic versus biosimilar (10 [1.11]), followed by needle length (8.06 [1.11]), dose measurement (6.38 [0.87]), refrigeration (3.81 [1.18]), and angle of injection (1.30 [0.66]). Unobserved preference heterogeneity was present and controlled for in the analyses.

CONCLUSION

Despite the availability of biosimilar teriparatide in Colombia, patients expressed a strong preference for an originator biologic osteoporosis medicine over a biosimilar osteoporosis medicine, when the efficacy, safety, and cost of the two options were assumed to be the same.

A.GeelhoedMiranda J. J.GelensMariellede HaasKirstenJonkersRené E.KoopmanBartKramerHenkvan ManenMirjam J. G.MiedemaJelle R.MoorKaren C. C.MostardRémy L. M.NossentEsther J.OverbeekMarieke J.PeetersEllenvan RijswijkRein H. N. A. J.RyanHelenTakNelleke C.van VeenAnnekeVerhoevenLucylde VriesMichiel G. J.WapenaarMoniqueWegmanIngrid M. H.WetzelsJack. Validity of the Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM) Questionnaire

Background

This study assessed the validity and reliability of the generic module of the recently developed Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM) questionnaire in a sample of patients in the Netherlands.

Methods

The generic module of the PESaM questionnaire consists of 18 items related to the domains effectiveness, side effects and ease of use of medications. It assesses patients’ experiences regarding the impact of the medication on daily life, health and satisfaction. In 2017, the PESaM questionnaire was sent out to idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis patients using pirfenidone or nintedanib, atypical haemolytic uraemic syndrome patients receiving eculizumab and patients using tacrolimus after kidney transplantation. Mean scores for each domain were calculated applying a scoring algorithm. Construct validity and reliability were assessed using recommended methods.

Results

188 participants completed the generic module, of whom 48% used pirfenidone, 36% nintedanib, 11% tacrolimus and 5% eculizumab. The generic module has good structural properties. Internal consistency values of the domains were satisfactory (i.e. Cronbach’s coefficient alpha above 0.7). Confirmatory factor analysis provided further evidence for construct validity, with good convergent and discriminant validity. The PESaM questionnaire also showed different scores for patients using different medications, in line with expectations, and was therefore able to differentiate between patient groups. Test–retest reliability of the items and domains were rated as moderate to fair (i.e. intraclass coefficients ranged between 0.18 and 0.76).

Conclusions

The PESaM questionnaire is a unique patient-reported outcome measure evaluating patient experiences and satisfaction with medications. It has been developed in conjunction with patients, ensuring coverage of domains and issues relevant from the patient’s perspective. This study has shown promising validity of the generic module of the PESaM questionnaire. Further research is recommended to assess reliability in greater detail as well as the responsiveness of the measure.

Trial registration

The study is registered in The Netherlands National Trial Register (Trial Code 5860).

Development and Pretesting of a Questionnaire to Assess Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM Questionnaire)

Background

The aim of this study was to develop, together with the Lung Foundation Netherlands and Dutch Kidney Patients Association, patients and clinicians, a measure to evaluate patient experiences with the orphan drugs pirfenidone (for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis [IPF]) and eculizumab (for atypical haemolytic uraemic syndrome [aHUS]), as well as a generic measure of patient experiences and satisfaction with medications.

Methods

Development of the Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM) questionnaire consisted of four phases: literature review (phase I); focus groups and individual patient interviews (phase II); item generation (phase III); and face and content validity testing (phase IV). Literature review aimed to identify existing disease-specific and generic patient experience measures to provide guidance on the domains of medication use relevant to patients, the number of items and type of response categories, and to generate an initial pool of items. Subsequent focus groups and patient interviews were conducted to gain insight into the perceived effectiveness of the therapies, the burden of side effects, and how the medication impacted on a patient’s daily life. Focus groups and interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Coding was carried out by highlighting passages in the text and assigning each passage a code representing the following predefined categories: (1) perceived effectiveness; (2) side effects; (3) ease of use; and (4) impact of medication. Using data from phase I and II, a panel of experts selected items relevant for inclusion in the questionnaire. Individual patient interviews with IPF and aHUS patients (n = 18), using a retrospective verbal probing technique, were conducted to assess face validity, time needed to fill out the questionnaire, and content validity.

Results

The PESaM questionnaire that was developed consisted of two disease-specific modules that assessed patient experiences with pirfenidone for the treatment of IPF, and eculizumab for the treatment of aHUS, a generic module, applicable to any medication, and a module to assess patient expectations. Review of the literature identified multiple disease- or medication-specific questionnaires and two generic patient satisfaction questionnaires. Common domains across most questionnaires were effectiveness, side effects, ease of use and overall satisfaction. Patient interviews revealed the social impact (e.g. unable to go outside) of side effects such as photosensitivity associated with pirfenidone and the risk of infection associated with eculizumab. Each PESaM module focuses on patients’ perceived effectiveness of the medication, side effects, and ease of use, and the impact these aspects have on physical and emotional health and daily life. The generic module additionally includes items related to satisfaction with the medication. Individual interviews with patients in phase IV confirmed, in general, that questions and response options of the modules were clear and content validity was good. The mean time to complete the modules ranged from 6 min for the disease-specific (aHUS) module to 9 min for the generic module.

Conclusions

We developed the PESaM questionnaire to quantitatively assess patient experiences and satisfaction with medications. A validation study is currently underway to examine the psychometric properties of the PESaM questionnaire.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40271-017-0234-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication: Validation of the Translated Arabic Version among Patients Undergoing Warfarin Therapy in Saudi Arabia

OBJECTIVES

To validate the psychometric properties of the translated Arabic version of the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM 1.4) for patients on warfarin therapy in Saudi anticoagulation clinics (ACCs).

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted at the Security Forces Hospital ACC in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. It involved administering questionnaires related to patients' satisfaction and assessing adherence through interviews. The quality of the international normalized ratio control was assessed using the Rosendaal method. A psychometric evaluation of TSQM 1.4 was carried out, addressing internal consistency and known-groups and convergent validity.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients completed the questionnaire with an 80% response rate. The independent Cronbach α values for the effectiveness, side effects, and global satisfaction domains were consistently higher than 0.75, demonstrating good internal consistency and suitability of these domains for application in the current patients' setting. When these domains were used together in a multivariable logistic regression model of adherence, the only domain that remained significant was TSQM effectiveness (P = 0.017). Interestingly, a higher likelihood of moderate to optimal international normalized ratio control was significantly and independently associated with increased satisfaction scores in the effectiveness and convenience domains, but not in the side effects and global satisfaction domains.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence in favor of the reliability and validity of the Arabic version of TSQM 1.4 as a useful measure of satisfaction with anticoagulant therapy in patients visiting ACCs. The TSQM subscales in this patient setting seem to detect a clinically meaningful change over time, enhancing the potential of their use in routine practice.

Quantifying the relative importance to patients of avoiding symptoms and outcomes of heart failure

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate heart failure (HF) patients' disease knowledge and preferences for avoiding different disease outcomes.

METHODS

An online survey was administered to 400 individuals with a self-reported diagnosis of HF to elicit relative importance weights (RIWs) for avoiding 11 potential HF symptoms and outcomes using best-worst scaling. The survey also included questions about individuals' HF knowledge, and demographic and disease-experience characteristics. Differences in RIWs among sub-groups, defined by HF knowledge, caregiver support, age, recent hospitalization or emergency room visit for HF, health-related quality-of-life, and cardiac device experience were examined.

RESULTS

Relative to limitations in usual activities (RIW 1.00), respondents preferred avoiding severe, infrequent cardiovascular events (e.g. stroke [RIW 8.51], heart transplant [RIW 7.84], or heart attack [RIW 5.3]) most, followed by difficulty breathing (RIW 2.55), inability to enjoy life (RIW 1.84), cardiac device implantation (RIW 1.74), and atrial fibrillation (RIW 1.57). Patients preferred avoiding swelling (RIW 0.47) and fatigue (RIW 0.58) least. RIWs for avoiding severe, infrequent events were higher among those with high disease knowledge, those without caregivers, and those without a recent hospitalization or emergency room visit.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' preferences for avoiding HF outcomes vary across outcomes and by individuals' knowledge, caregiver status, and age. Healthcare providers should solicit and incorporate insights about patients' knowledge of HF and their preferences for avoiding HF outcomes into HF education and management planning efforts.

Preferences for Multiple Sclerosis Treatments: Using a Discrete-Choice Experiment to Examine Differences Across Subgroups of US Patients

BACKGROUND

The growing number of treatments for relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS) provides opportunities to consider patient preferences in treatment decisions.

METHODS

We designed a Web-based, discrete-choice experiment survey to analyze treatment preferences in patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). The survey presented hypothetical MS treatments defined by six attributes: risk of MS progression, time between relapses, risk of serious infection, treatment-related flu-like symptoms and gastrointestinal symptoms, and route and frequency of administration. Preference weights estimated with random-parameters logit were used to calculate importance scores and preference shares among three pairs of subsamples.

RESULTS

Patients with a self-reported physician diagnosis of RRMS (N = 301) completed the survey: 56% rated their disability level as normal or mild; 43% currently used a self-injectable treatment. Respondents with normal or mild disability levels placed greater weight on avoiding injections with flu-like symptoms and risk of progression, whereas patients with worse disability placed greater weight on reducing risk of progression and risk of serious infection. Patients taking injectables placed the most weight on risk of progression and risk of serious infection, whereas respondents not taking injectables placed the most weight on route and frequency of administration. Differences in preferences between subgroups were significant (P < .05). The presence of common adverse events associated with daily pills and injectables altered predicted preferences for route of administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Preferences of patients with RRMS varied depending on current treatment and disability level, especially regarding mode of administration. Considering patient preferences for treatment features may lead to higher treatment satisfaction and adherence.

Protocol for a randomised controlled trial evaluating the effects of providing essential medicines at no charge: the Carefully seLected and Easily Accessible at No Charge Medicines (CLEAN Meds) trial

INTRODUCTION

Cost-related non-adherence to medicines is common in low-income, middle-income and high-income countries such as Canada. Medicine non-adherence is associated with poor health outcomes and increased mortality. This randomised trial will test the impact of a carefully selected list of essential medicines at no charge (compared with usual medicine access) in primary care patients reporting cost-related non-adherence.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is an open-label, parallel two-arm, superiority, individually randomised controlled trial conducted in three primary care sites (one urban, two rural) in Ontario, Canada, that was codesigned by a community guidance panel. Adult patients (≥18 years) who report cost-related non-adherence to medicines are eligible to participate in the study. Participants will be randomised to receive free and convenient access to a carefully selected list of 125 essential medicines (based on the WHO's Model List of Essential Medicines) or usual means of medicine access. Care for patients in both groups will otherwise be unchanged. The primary outcome of this trial is adherence to appropriately prescribed medicines. Secondary outcomes include medicine adherence, appropriate prescribing, blood pressure, haemoglobin A1c, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, patient-oriented outcomes and healthcare costs. All participants will be followed for at least 12 months.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was obtained in all three participating sites. Results of the main trial and secondary outcomes will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and discussed with members of the public and decision makers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02744963.

Patient satisfaction after switching from warfarin to apixaban in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: AGAIN study

PURPOSE

Patients treated with warfarin must adhere to frequent monitoring, dietary restrictions, and complicated dose adjustments. Apixaban, a direct factor Xa inhibitor, is an alternative to warfarin that may reduce patient burdens associated with warfarin therapy. However, there is limited evidence pertaining to patient satisfaction with anticoagulant therapies in Japanese patients. The purpose of this observational study was to investigate changes in patient satisfaction after switching from warfarin to apixaban.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients who were scheduled to switch anticoagulants from warfarin to apixaban were enrolled and treated with apixaban for 12 weeks. Patient satisfaction was assessed before the change in medication and after 12 weeks of treatment with apixaban using the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS), a patient-reported instrument for measuring satisfaction with anticoagulation treatment. The ACTS includes a 12-item burden scale (maximum 60 points) and a 3-item benefit scale (maximum 15 points).

RESULTS

Among 732 NVAF patients enrolled, the full analysis set consisted of 697 patients who completed two ACTS assessments (one before the medication change and one 12 weeks after the change). Mean (±standard deviation) patient age was 76.2±9.1 years and mean CHADS₂ score was 2.5±1.3. There were no significant changes in ACTS benefit scores. However, ACTS burden scores showed significant improvements at Week 12 compared to baseline (55.6±5.3 at Week 12 and 49.7±8.7 at baseline; P<0.0001). Factors associated with changes in ACTS burden scores from the multiple logistic regression analysis were age ≥70 years (odds ratio [OR]: 1.86; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.12-3.10; P=0.0169), baseline ACTS burden score (OR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.75-0.82; P<0.0001), and use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs/antiplatelet drugs (OR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.36-1.00; P=0.0499).

CONCLUSION

Switching from warfarin to apixaban improved patient satisfaction with anticoagulant therapy in Japanese patients with NVAF by reducing burden of treatment.

A survey of patient preferences for oral antihyperglycemic therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

INTRODUCTION

Previous research has demonstrated a correlation among patient preferences, dosing burden, and medication nonadherence, a well-recognized challenge in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The objective of this study was to elicit preferences for alternative dosing regimens for oral antihyperglycemic therapies among patients with T2DM and to quantify differences in dosing preferences among patients with different characteristics.

METHODS

Preferences for dosing of oral antihyperglycemic drugs (OAD) were evaluated by surveying patients with T2DM in the United States (US). Survey participants were adult US patients with T2DM who were taking no or only 1 OAD and no injectable therapies. Each patient completed a web-enabled discrete-choice experiment (DCE) including a series of 8 pairs of hypothetical OAD profiles. Each profile was defined by reductions in average glucose, dosing schedule (e.g., once-weekly, once-daily, or twice-daily dosing), chance of mild-to-moderate gastrointestinal side effects, frequency of hypoglycemia, weight change, incremental risk of congestive heart failure, and cost. Each participant also answered a direct question about dosing preference. Random-parameters logit was used to analyze the DCE data. Prespecified subgroups were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 2,262 patients invited to participate, 923 were included in the analysis (mean age 63 years, 45% male, 79% white). Reducing dosing frequency was statistically significantly important to patients; however, it was relatively less important than medication cost or clinical outcomes. On average, patients preferred once-weekly to once-daily dosing. Patients not currently taking an OAD had a stronger preference for once-weekly dosing than patients on treatment (P = 0.012). Patients younger than 45 years had a stronger preference for weekly dosing than older patients (P < 0.075).

CONCLUSIONS

For younger patients and patients not currently on treatment, once-weekly dosing may provide additional incentive to initiate and adhere to antihyperglycemic treatment; however, additional research will be required to confirm this hypothesis.