From drug-delivery device to disease management tool: a study of preferences for enhanced features in next-generation self-injection devices

Le résumé fourni par la source

PURPOSE: To quantify rheumatology patient preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for features differentiating enhanced from standard self-injection devices and to investigate differences among subgroups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) were recruited in the UK. A discrete-choice experiment was used to elicit preferences; respondents were presented with 10 choices between 3 different devices: a free standard disposable device, and 2 hypothetical reusable devices characterized by presence/absence of skin sensor, injection speed control, on-screen instructions, injection reminders, electronic log, and large grip. Every hypothetical device included a cost component to assess WTP for each enhanced feature. A random-parameters logit model was used to estimate preference weights and WTP. RESULTS: Data were collected from 323 respondents by electronic survey (15/11/2017-15/02/2018; RA: 108; PsA: 103; axSpA: 112). On average, the skin sensor was the most preferred feature (£30), followed by injection speed control, injection reminders, electronic log (~£20 each), on-screen instructions (~£12), and a device with a small, rather than large grip (~£7). Similar preferences for attributes were observed across condition subgroups except for grip size: axSpA patients preferred small grip (~£27); PsA patients preferred large grip (~£19). Overall, respondents preferred reusable devices with all enhanced features (WTP value: £85) over the standard device. RA patients exhibited a higher WTP (£145) than PsA (£102) or axSpA (£62) for the same enhanced device. CONCLUSION: Patients positively valued reusable self-injection devices with enhanced features, which may improve patient experience, potentially improving treatment adherence, clinical, and economic outcomes.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.