ADC

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH REGISTER


[Advanced]
The most recent version of this article was published on 1 February 2008

Arch Dis Child. Published Online First: 5 April 2007. doi:10.1136/adc.2006.105353
Copyright © 2007 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
adc.2006.105353v1
93/2/110    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in ADC Online
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ahmed, S F.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ahmed, S F.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, W.
Topic Collections
Right arrowRelevant Article

Original articles

Facilitating and understanding the family’s choice of injection device for growth hormone therapy by using conjoint analysis

S Faisal Ahmed 1*, Chris Blamires 2 and Wilma Smith 1

1 Royal Hospital For Sick Children, United Kingdom
2 2. Decision Modelling Consultancy Ltd, United Kingdom

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: s.f.ahmed{at}clinmed.gla.ac.uk.

Accepted 25 March 2007


*   Abstract

Background: Conjoint analysis involves the measurement of consumer preferences between choice alternatives.

Aims & Objectives:To investigate the use of conjoint analysis in facilitating and understanding choice of growth hormone injection devices.

Method and Subjects:Fifty-six patients and their parents participated in an electronic, computer-based interview. The interview took a median time of 18mins (range, 12-30), and allowed an immediate matching of injection devices to the family’s preferences.

Results:Amongst the key drivers of choice, lack of bruising was rated highest and designated an index of 100. Compared to this, the remaining attributes in order of desirability were: auto-injector (98), lack of pain (93), light-weight (88), silent (82), ready-mixed (77), ease of holding (69), telephone help-line (66), needle free (62), small size (60), nurse support (47), hidden needle (45), stored in fridge (13), home delivery (6). Out of the 17 families who had already chosen a device previously by discussion with the clinic nurse, the computer model placed their device either as first or second out of seven devices tested.

Conclusion:Adaptive or interactive conjoint analysis applied at the patient level, can facilitate the choice-making process whilst providing an insight into the relative importance of the key features that influence choice.

Keywords: adherence, choice, therapy


Relevant Article

Measuring the benefits of growth hormone therapy in children: a role for preference-based approaches?
Petrou and McIntosh
Arch. Dis. Child. 2008 93: 95-97. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Arch. Dis. Child.Home page
Petrou and McIntosh
Measuring the benefits of growth hormone therapy in children: a role for preference-based approaches?
Arch. Dis. Child., February 1, 2008; 93(2): 95 - 97.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH REGISTER
ARCH DIS CHILD FETAL NEONATAL ED ED PRACTICE
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2007 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health