Journal
EPILEPSY & BEHAVIOR
Volume 80, Issue -, Pages 247-253Publisher
ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2018.01.025
Keywords
Epilepsy; Shared decision-making; Treatment attributes
Categories
Funding
- Sunovion Pharmaceuticals
- Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Objective: This assessment was conducted to quantify and compare patient and neurologist preferences regarding antiepileptic drug (AED) attributes for treating epilepsy. Methods: Patients with epilepsy (>18 years, treated with AEDs) and neurologists were recruited from nationally representative US panels to complete an online survey that included a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Participants chose between two hypothetical AEDs, characterized by six attributes in the DCE, which included 1) level of seizure control/reduction; 2) closing frequency, 3) diminished coordination and balance, 4) psychiatric issues, 5) diminished energy level, and 6) dietary restrictions. The Sawtooth Software Choice-Based Conjoint (CBC) System for CBC Analysis was used to estimate treatment attribute ranking and weighting. Results: Of the 720 respondents (518 patients and 202 neurologists), both patients and neurologists ranked seizure control as the most important attribute (rank 1) and dietary restrictions as the least important attribute (rank 6). However, seizure control had a significantly greater weighting in neurologists decision-making than among patients (45% vs 32%, p < 0.005). On the other hand, patients considered the risks of psychiatric adverse effects (19% vs 15%), diminished coordination and balance (16% vs 10%), and fatigue or diminished energy (13% vs 11%) as significantly more important (p < 0.05) than did neurologists. Conclusion: Patients and neurologists had similar preference ranking order, with seizure reduction being ranked the most important attribute. However, neurologist treatment preferences were significantly more influenced by seizure reduction while patient preferences were significantly more influenced by adverse effects that may impact their quality of life. Understanding how patient and neurologist perspectives differ should encourage dialog to communicate the potential risks and benefits of AED therapy and assist in the shared decision-making process. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available