Determine patient preferences by means of conjoint analysis

July 29, 2014, Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care

The Conjoint Analysis (CA) method is in principle suitable to find out which preferences patients have regarding treatment goals. However, to widely use it in health economic evaluations, some (primarily methodological) issues still need to be clarified. This is the result of a pilot project by the German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG). Following the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), CA is the second method tested by the Institute together with external experts.

Summarize outcome-specific results to an overall value

In its health economic evaluations IQWiG works with a particular method, the efficiency frontier concept. Efficiency frontiers can be drawn either for an aggregated outcome or for a single outcome criterion such as mortality (death rate), morbidity (symptoms and complaints) or quality of life. However, often data are only available for single outcome criteria. To summarize efficiency frontiers for different patient-relevant outcomes to an overall evaluation, that is, to aggregate them, the individual results must be weighted. Patient preferences, for example, can be used for this purpose.

Involvement of patients has so far been insufficient

In two pilot projects IQWiG has therefore tested the two most widely distributed methods used internationally to determine patient preferences. IQWiG already presented the working paper on AHP in June 2013; the working paper on CA is now also available.

Patients are in a way the "end-consumers" of medical interventions. In many countries they are therefore involved in the assessments of benefits and costs. However, so far this has not happened in a systematic, transparent and reproducible way. In addition, purely qualitative approaches are generally used, but not quantitative ones such as CA or AHP.

Both patients and physicians questioned

Using a choice-based variation of CA (discrete choice experiment) the researchers questioned both patients with chronic hepatitis C (HCV) and healthcare professionals involved in their care – first in separate focus groups and then by means of questionnaires. A total of 326 patients and 21 physicians participated.

The questions referred to different dimensions of benefits and harms: effectiveness (e.g. absence of the virus, also called "sustained virological response"), avoidance of side effects (e.g. gastro-intestinal complaints), as well as effort involved (e.g. frequency of injections), and duration of .

Respondents were to choose between "scenarios"

The participants were to choose 18 times between two fictitious treatment alternatives that were composed of various treatment characteristics (attributes) and that differed according to the levels of the characteristics.

The levels of a total of seven attributes were varied multiple times and repeatedly recombined: In such a scenario, Treatment A lasted 48 weeks and Treatment B lasted 24 weeks; the probability of gastro-intestinal complaints was 35% (A) and 25% (B). In the next scenario, with 12 weeks, Treatment A only lasted half as long as Treatment B (24 weeks); the risk of gastro-intestinal side effects was clearly lower for A than for B (25% versus 45%).

Patient preferences versus opinions of healthcare professionals

If the results of all of these choices are analysed using logistic regression models, it is possible to derive the relative importance (weighting) of the individual treatment attributes. For example, it can be calculated how much higher the chance of cure (absence of the virus) must be so that patients accept a certain higher risk of more frequent or more severe side effects.

A comparison of the analysis of patients and physicians shows that the sequence of treatment goals is largely congruent. However, differences exist in the strength of weighting: In both groups "sustained absence of the virus" is ranked in first place; however, if they are to choose a treatment, this attribute is even more crucial for physicians than for patients.

CA is manageable for patients

After this pilot project, IQWiG assesses the CA – as previously the AHP – to be a basically suitable and manageable method. "Patients can handle the procedure and it delivers useful results. One could thus employ the CA for weighting outcomes", says Andreas Gerber-Grote, Head of IQWiG's Health Economics Department.

Both procedures have strengths and weaknesses

Whereas the CA works with multidimensional scenarios, the AHP in each case involves pairwise comparisons (e.g. duration of treatment versus side effects). "For the CA one could thus say that the procedure is closer to decision-making situations as they occur in the real world. The attributes are always assessed here in a batch", explains Gerber-Grote. "However, the complexity of the decision increases with the number of attributes. If one only considers two attributes at the same time – as in the AHP – this is more transparent for respondents."

Clarify methodological issues before widespread use

According to the Deputy Director of the Institute, Stefan Lange, one should bear in mind that "both pilot projects were successful, but before we can widely use CA or AHP in assessments, a whole range of challenges still exist, primarily of a methodological nature."

He added: "It needs to be clarified beforehand who is to be questioned: patients, physicians or – as in the United Kingdom – a sample of the general population? In any case an agreement is required on how representative the selection of respondents has to be. And one needs to determine which degree of precision is required, i.e., how robust the results have to be. This is because the higher the demands, the more people have to be questioned, and the greater the effort involved. Unlike in clinical studies, no standards exist so far as to how the sample size should be planned."

Explore further: Sofosbuvir: Indication of added benefit for specific patients

More information: Executive summary of the working paper : … onjoint-Analysis.pdf

Related Stories

Sofosbuvir: Indication of added benefit for specific patients

May 2, 2014
The drug sofosbuvir has been available since January 2014 as a treatment for chronic hepatitis C infection. In an early benefit assessment pursuant to the Act on the Reform of the Market for Medicinal Products (AMNOG), the ...

Palliation is rarely a topic in studies on advanced cancer

April 24, 2014
End-of-life aspects, the corresponding terminology, and the relevance of palliation in advanced cancer are often not considered in publications on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This is the result of an analysis by ...

Breast cancer: DMP is largely consistent with guidelines

July 16, 2014
On 16 July 2014 the German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) published the results of a literature search for evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of people with breast cancer. ...

Ipilimumab in advanced melanoma: Added benefit for non-pretreated patients not proven

March 18, 2014
The German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) already assessed the added benefit of ipilimumab in advanced melanoma in 2012. A considerable added benefit was found for patients who had already received ...

Ipilimumab in advanced melanoma: Added benefit for non-pretreated patients not proven

June 12, 2014
In early 2014, the German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) assessed the added benefit of ipilimumab in non-pretreated patients with advanced melanoma. The drug manufacturer claimed a noticeable ...

Dolutegravir in HIV-1 infection: Added benefit in adult patients

May 21, 2014
Dolutegravir has been approved since January 2014 in combination with other antiretroviral drugs for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infected adults and adolescents above 12 years of age. In an early benefit ...

Recommended for you

In most surgery patients, length of opioid prescription, number of refills spell highest risk for misuse

January 17, 2018
The possible link between physicians' opioid prescription patterns and subsequent abuse has occupied the attention of a nation in the throes of an opioid crisis looking for ways to stem what experts have dubbed an epidemic. ...

Patients receive most opioids at the doctor's office, not the ER

January 16, 2018
Around the country, state legislatures and hospitals have tightened emergency room prescribing guidelines for opioids to curb the addiction epidemic, but a new USC study shows that approach diverts attention from the main ...

FDA bans use of opioid-containing cough meds by kids

January 12, 2018
(HealthDay)—Trying to put a dent in the ongoing opioid addiction crisis, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Thursday slapped strict new restrictions on the use of opioid-containing cold and cough products by kids.

Taking ibuprofen for long periods found to alter human testicular physiology

January 9, 2018
A team of researchers from Denmark and France has found that taking regular doses of the pain reliever ibuprofen over a long period of time can lead to a disorder in men called compensated hypogonadism. In their paper published ...

Nearly one-third of Canadians have used opioids: study

January 9, 2018
Nearly one in three Canadians (29 percent) have used "some form of opioids" in the past five years, according to data released Tuesday as widespread fentanyl overdoses continue to kill.

Growing opioid epidemic forcing more children into foster care

January 8, 2018
The opioid epidemic has become so severe it's considered a national public health emergency. Addiction to prescription painkillers, such as oxycodone and morphine, has contributed to a dramatic rise in overdose deaths and ...


Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.