Navigating Public Policy Responses to a Pandemic: The Balancing Act Between Physical Health, Mental Health, and Household Income.

OBJECTIVE: During COVID-19, governments imposed restrictions that reduced pandemic-related health risks but likely increased personal and societal mental health risk, partly through reductions in household income. This study aimed to quantify the public's willingness to accept trade-offs between pandemic health risks, household income reduction, and increased risk of mental illness that may result from future pandemic-related policies. METHODS: A total of 547 adults from an online panel participated in a discrete choice experiment where they were asked to choose between hypothetical future pandemic scenarios. Each scenario was characterized by personal and societal risks of dying from the pandemic, experiencing long-term complications, developing anxiety/depression, and reductions in household income. A latent class regression was used to estimate trade-offs. RESULTS: Respondents state a willingness to make trade-offs across these attributes if the benefits are large enough. They are willing to accept 0.8% lower household income (0.7-1.0), 2.7% higher personal risk of anxiety/depression (1.8-3.6), or 3.2% higher societal rate of anxiety/depression (1.7-4.7) in exchange for 300 fewer deaths from the pandemic. CONCLUSION: Results reveal that individuals are willing to accept lower household income and higher rates of mental illness, both personal and societal, if the physical health benefits are large enough. Respondents placed greater emphasis on maintaining personal, as opposed to societal, mental health risk and were most interested in preventing pandemic-related deaths. Governments should consider less restrictive policies when pandemics have high morbidity but low mortality to avoid the prospect of improving physical health while simultaneously reducing net social welfare.

Patient Preferences in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension, a Latent Class Analysis to Identify Preference Heterogeneity.

OBJECTIVES: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a chronic, progressive disease of the pulmonary circulation characterized by vascular remodeling that, if untreated, can lead to right heart dysfunction and death. This analysis measured heterogeneity in patient preferences for PAH-specific treatment regimens. METHOD: Adult patients with PAH with slight to marked limitations during physical activity were recruited through a patient organization in Germany. Participants completed an online best-worst scaling case 3 survey. Patients chose among 3 hypothetical treatment profiles defined by 6 benefits and risks at varying levels. Participants completed 12 choice tasks. Preference heterogeneity was assessed using latent class analysis. RESULTS: A total of 83 participants (76% female) completed the survey. Best-fit model revealed 4 classes. Class 1 (19% of participants) assigned importance to multiple attributes particularly side effects, class 2 (34%) to physical activity limitations, class 3 (30%) to survival and physical activity limitations, and class 4 (17%) to survival. No differences in sociodemographic characteristics were observed across classes. Compared with other classes, class 4 was most likely to report having marked physical activity limitations (79%) and needing daily help (100%), while considering higher daily activity levels to be ordinary (walking >1 km [71%] or climbing several flights of stairs [50%]). CONCLUSION: This first patient preference study in a PAH population suggests that physical activity limitations in addition to survival matter most to patients; however, preference heterogeneity between groups of patients was observed. Patient preferences should be considered in treatment decision making to better balance patient's expectations regarding the known risk-benefit ratio of treatment.

Divergent preferences for enhanced HIV testing options among high-risk populations in northern Tanzania: a short report.

To achieve the UNAIDS target of diagnosing 95% of all persons living with HIV, enhanced HIV testing services with greater attractional value need to be developed and implemented. We conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to quantify preferences for enhanced HIV testing features across two high-risk populations in the Kilimanjaro Region in northern Tanzania. We designed and fielded a survey with 12 choice tasks to systematically recruited female barworkers and male mountain porters. Key enhanced features included: testing availability on every day of the week, an oral test, integration of a general health check or an examination for sexually transmitted infections (STI) with HIV testing, and provider-assisted confidential partner notification in the event of a positive HIV test result. Across 300 barworkers and 440 porters surveyed, mixed logit analyses of 17,760 choices indicated strong preferences for everyday testing availability, health checks, and STI examinations. Most participants were averse to oral testing and confidential partner notification by providers. Substantial preference heterogeneity was observed within each risk group. Enhancing HIV testing services to include options for everyday testing, general health checks, and STI examinations may increase the appeal of HIV testing offers to high-risk populations.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02714140.

Accounting for Preference Heterogeneity in Discrete-Choice Experiments: An ISPOR Special Interest Group Report.

OBJECTIVES: Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are increasingly used to elicit preferences for health and healthcare. Although many applications assume preferences are homogenous, there is a growing portfolio of methods to understand both explained (because of observed factors) and unexplained (latent) heterogeneity. Nevertheless, the selection of analytical methods can be challenging and little guidance is available. This study aimed to determine the state of practice in accounting for preference heterogeneity in the analysis of health-related DCEs, including the views and experiences of health preference researchers and an overview of the tools that are commonly used to elicit preferences. METHODS: An online survey was developed and distributed among health preference researchers and nonhealth method experts, and a systematic review of the DCE literature in health was undertaken to explore the analytical methods used and summarize trends. RESULTS: Most respondents (n = 59 of 70, 84%) agreed that accounting for preference heterogeneity provides a richer understanding of the data. Nevertheless, there was disagreement on how to account for heterogeneity; most (n = 60, 85%) stated that more guidance was needed. Notably, the majority (n = 41, 58%) raised concern about the increasing complexity of analytical methods. Of the 342 studies included in the review, half (n = 175, 51%) used a mixed logit with continuous distributions for the parameters, and a third (n = 110, 32%) used a latent class model. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is agreement about the importance of accounting for preference heterogeneity, there are noticeable disagreements and concerns about best practices, resulting in a clear need for further analytical guidance.

Comparison of online and face-to-face valuation of the EQ-5D-5L using composite time trade-off.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare online, unsupervised and face-to-face (F2F), supervised valuation of EQ-5D-5L health states using composite time trade-off (cTTO) tasks. METHODS: The official EuroQol experimental design and valuation protocol for the EQ-5D-5L of 86 health states were implemented in interviewer-assisted, F2F and unsupervised, online studies. Validity of preferences was assessed using prevalence of inconsistent valuations and expected patterns of TTO values. Respondent task engagement was measured using number of trade-offs and time per task. Trading patterns such as better-than-dead only was compared between modes. Value sets were generated using linear regression with a random intercept (RILR). Value set characteristics such as range of scale and dimension ranking were evaluated between modes. RESULTS: Five hundred one online and 1,134 F2F respondents completed the surveys. Mean elicited TTO values were higher online than F2F when compared by health state severity. Compared to F2F, a larger proportion of online respondents did not assign the poorest EQ-5D-5L health state (i.e., 55555) the lowest TTO value ([Online] 41.3% [F2F] 12.2%) (p < 0.001). A higher percentage of online cTTO tasks were completed in 3 trade-offs or fewer ([Online] 15.8% [F2F] 3.7%), (p < 0.001). When modeled using the RILR, the F2F range of scale was larger than online ([Online] 0.600 [F2F] 1.307) and the respective dimension rankings differed. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to F2F data, TTO tasks conducted online had more inconsistencies and decreased engagement, which contributed to compromised data quality. This study illustrates the challenges of conducting online valuation studies using the TTO approach.

Patient Preferences in the Treatment of Hemophilia A: A Best-Worst Scaling Case 3 Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess patient preferences for benefits and risks in hemophilia A treatment. METHODS: A systematic literature search and pretest interviews were conducted to determine the most patient-relevant endpoints in terms of effects, risks, and administration of hemophilia A treatments. A Best-Worst Scaling (BWS; Case 3 or multiprofile case) approach was applied in a structured questionnaire. Patients were surveyed by interviewers in a computer-assisted personal interview. Treatments in the choice scenarios comprised bleeding frequency per year, application type, risk of thromboembolic event risk, and inhibitor development. Each respondent answered 13 choice tasks, including 1 dominant task, comparing 3 treatment profiles. Data were analyzed using a mixed logit model (random-parameters logit). RESULTS: Data from 57 patients were used. The attributes "bleeding frequency per year" and "inhibitor development" had the greatest impact on respondents' choice decisions. Patients disliked being at risk of inhibitor development more than being at risk of thromboembolic events. The type of application, whether intravenous or subcutaneous, was of less importance for patients. There was a significant preference variation for all attributes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients value low frequency of bleeding per year and low risk of development of inhibitors the most. An increase of risk and frequency would significantly decrease the impact on choice decisions. The type of application does not seem to influence the choice decision very much compared with the other attributes. Regarding preference heterogeneity, further analysis is needed to identify subgroups among patients and their characteristics. This may help to adapt individually patient-tailored treatment alternatives for hemophilia A patients.

Heterogeneous Patient Preferences for Modern Antiretroviral Therapy: Results of a Discrete Choice Experiment.

OBJECTIVE: Limited data describe patient preferences for the growing number of antiretroviral therapies (ARTs). We quantified preferences for key characteristics of modern ART deemed relevant to shared decision making. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment survey elicited preferences for ART characteristics, including dosing (frequency and number of pills), administration characteristics (pill size and meal requirement), most bothersome side effect (from diarrhea, sleep disturbance, headaches, dizziness/difficulty thinking, depression, or jaundice), and most bothersome long-term effect (from increased risk of heart attacks, bone fractures, renal dysfunction, hypercholesterolemia, or hyperglycemia). Between March and August 2017, the discrete choice experiment was fielded to 403 treatment-experienced persons living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), enrolled from 2 infectious diseases clinics in the southern United States and a national online panel. Participants completed 16 choice tasks, each comparing 3 treatment options. Preferences were analyzed using mixed and latent class logit models. RESULTS: Most participants were male (68%) and older (interquartile range: 42-58 years), and had substantial treatment experience (interquartile range: 7-21 years). In mixed logit analyses, all attributes were associated with preferences. Side and long-term effects were most important, with evidence of substantial preference heterogeneity. Latent class analysis identified 5 preference classes. For classes 1 (40%), 2 (24%), and 3 (21%), side effects were most important, followed by long-term effects. For class 4 (10%), dosing was most important. Class 5 (4%) was largely indifferent to ART characteristics. CONCLUSION: Overall, treatment-experienced persons living with HIV valued minimizing side effects and long-term toxicities over dosing and administration characteristics. Preferences varied widely, highlighting the need to elicit individual patient preferences in models of shared antiretroviral decision making.

Public preferences for the allocation of donor organs for transplantation: Focus group discussions.

BACKGROUND: Deceased donor organs are scarce resources because of a large supply-and-demand mismatch. This scarcity leads to an ethical dilemma, forcing priority-setting of how these organs should be allocated and whom to leave behind. OBJECTIVE: To explore public preferences for the allocation of donor organs in regard to ethical aspects of distributive justice. METHODS: Focus groups were facilitated between November and December 2018 at Hannover Medical School. Participants were recruited locally. Transcripts were assessed with content analysis using the deductive framework method. All identified and discussed criteria were grouped according to the principles of distributive justice and reported following the COREQ statement. RESULTS: Six focus groups with 31 participants were conducted. Overall, no group made a final decision of how to allocate donor organ; however, we observed that not only a single criterion/principle but rather a combination of criteria/principles is relevant. Therefore, the public wants to allocate organs to save as many lives as possible by both maximizing success for and also giving priority to urgent patients considering the best compatibility. Age, waiting time, reciprocity and healthy lifestyles should be used as additional criteria, while sex, financial status and family responsibility should not, based on aspects of equality. CONCLUSIONS: All participants recognized the dilemma that prioritizing one patient might cause another one to die. They discussed mainly the unclear trade-offs between effectiveness/benefit and medical urgency and did not establish an agreement about their importance. The results suggest a need of preference studies to elucidate public preferences in organ allocation.

Patient Preferences Concerning Alternative Treatments for Neuroendocrine Tumors: Results of the "PIANO-Study".

OBJECTIVES: Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are rare, slow-growing malignant tumors. So far, there are no data on patient preferences regarding its therapy. This empirical study aimed to elicit patient preferences in the drug treatment of NET. METHODS: Based on qualitative patient interviews and an analytic hierarchy process, six patient-relevant attributes were analyzed and weighted using a discrete-choice experiment. Patients were recruited with the help of a NET support group. An experimental 3*3 + 6*3 -MNL design was created using NGene. The design consisted of eighty-four choices, divided into seven blocks. Participants were randomly assigned to these blocks. The analysis included random parameter logit and latent class models. RESULTS: A total of 275 participants (51.6 percent female; mean age, 58.4 years) were included. The preference analysis within the random parameter logit model, taking into account the 95 percent confidence interval, showed predominance for the attribute "overall survival." The attributes "response to treatment" and "stabilization of tumor growth" followed. The side effects "nausea/vomiting" and "diarrhea" were considered of relatively equal importance. Latent class analysis of possible subgroup differences revealed three preference patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Preferences can influence therapeutic decisions. Preference analyses indicated that "overall survival" had the strongest influence, with participants clearly weighing outcome attributes higher than side effect attributes. In conclusion, mono-criterial decisions would not fully reflect patient perspectives.

[The Probabilistic Efficiency Frontier: A Value Assessment of Treatment Options in Hepatitis C]. / Die probabilistische Effizienzgrenze: eine Wirtschaftlichkeitsanalyse von Therapieoptionen im Indikationsgebiet Hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: The German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) recommends the concept of the efficiency frontier to assess health care interventions. The efficiency frontier supports regulatory decisions on reimbursement prices for the appropriate allocation of health care resources. Until today this cost-benefit assessment framework has only been applied on the basis of individual patient-relevant endpoints. This contradicts the reality of a multi-dimensional patient benefit. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to illustrate the operationalization of multi-dimensional benefit considering the uncertainty in clinical effects and preference data in order to calculate the efficiency of different treatment options for hepatitis C (HCV). This case study shows how methodological challenges could be overcome in order to use the efficiency frontier for economic analysis and health care decision-making. METHOD: The operationalization of patient benefit was carried out on several patient-relevant endpoints. Preference data from a discrete choice experiment (DCE) study and clinical data based on clinical trials, which reflected the patient and the clinical perspective, respectively, were used for the aggregation of an overall benefit score. A probabilistic efficiency frontier was constructed in a Monte Carlo simulation with 10000 random draws. Patient-relevant endpoints were modeled with a beta distribution and preference data with a normal distribution. The assessment of overall benefit and costs provided information about the adequacy of the treatment prices. The parameter uncertainty was illustrated by the price-acceptability-curve and the net monetary benefit. RESULTS: Based on the clinical and preference data in Germany, the interferon-free treatment options proved to be efficient for the current price level. The interferon-free therapies of the latest generation achieved a positive net cost-benefit. Within the decision model, these therapies showed a maximum overall benefit. Due to their high additional benefit and approved prices, the therapies lie above of the extrapolated efficiency frontier, which suggests that these options have efficient reimbursement prices. Considering uncertainty, even a higher price would have resulted in a positive cost-benefit ratio. CONCLUSION: IQWiG's efficiency frontier was used to assess the value of different treatment options in HCV. This study demonstrates that the probabilistic efficiency frontier, price-acceptability-curve and the net monetary benefit can contribute essential information to reimbursement decisions and price negotiations.

PATIENT PRIORITIES FOR TREATMENT ATTRIBUTES IN ADJUNCTIVE DRUG THERAPY OF SEVERE HYPERCHOLESTEROLEMIA IN GERMANY: AN ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS.

OBJECTIVES: Severe hypercholesterolemia is a major cause of death in coronary heart disease. New adjunctive drug therapies have passed authorization processes and been launched recently. So far it is not known which properties of the new treatment options generate the highest benefit for patients. The aim was to evaluate patient priorities in the field of adjunctive drug therapy with apheresis. Therapy characteristics were examined as to their relevance to hypercholesterolemia patients. METHODS: To identify all potential patient-relevant treatment characteristics, a systematic literature review and ten interviews with patients were conducted. Seven key characteristics were identified from the patient perspective. Patients' priorities were elicited using an analytic hierarchy process (AHP). RESULTS: In total, N = 61 patients diagnosed with severe hypercholesterolemia and undergoing apheresis participated in the study. The analysis showed predominance for the attribute "reduction of LDL-C level in blood" (Wglobal:0.362). The "risk of myopathy" (Wglobal:0.164), "risk of neurocognitive impairment" (Wglobal:0.161) and "frequency of apheresis" (Wglobal:0.119) were ranked second, third and fourth. Subgroup analyses revealed that "frequency of apheresis" is of greater importance to younger patients, men and/or patients who indicated a reduction in quality of life due to apheresis. CONCLUSIONS: The essential decision criteria for optimal therapy from the patients' perspective were obtained. "Reduction of lipoprotein in blood" was ranked highest compared with the "mode of administration" and "side effects" characteristics. The study offers a transparent approach for the identification of patient priorities for adjunctive PCSK9-inhibitor therapy in apheresis-treated hypercholesterolemia. The project can be used by healthcare decision makers to understand the importance of each patient-relevant endpoint.

[Benefit Assessment for Examination and Treatment Methods with Medical Devices of High Hisk: Trade-off between Patient Benefit, Evidence and Access]. / Nutzenbewertung für Untersuchungs- und Behandlungsmethoden mit Medizinprodukten hoher Klassen: Die Abwägung von Patientennutzen, Evidenz und Zugang.

The lately inured § 137 h SGB V aims to assess the benefit of new examination and treatment methods with medical devices of class IIb and III. In the future, the decision on the reimbursement eligibility will be marked by high requirements in terms of documentation of benefits and harm. The objective of benefit assessment is the operationalization of benefit to patients. A comparative determination of benefit enables rational decision by regulatory authorities. The process of benefit assessment should guarantee transparent decision-making, and the underlying medical and health economic fundamentals should be documented. In principle, benefit assessment can be divided into 3 phases: measuring causal effects of an intervention, assessment of the measured effects and decision on reimbursement based on the aggregation of an overall benefit. To address the peculiarities of medical devices in this process, adaptive study designs, MCDA and adaptive benefit assessment provide a sustainable concept for rapid access by patients to innovative treatments of high quality and safety.

Incentives for Blood Donation: A Discrete Choice Experiment to Analyze Extrinsic Motivation.

Background: Demographic trends affect size and age structure of populations. One of the consequences will be an increasing need for blood products to treat age-related diseases. Donation services rely on voluntariness and charitable motivation. It might be questioned whether there will be sufficient blood supply with voluntary donation. The present study focused on elicitation of preferences for incentives and aimed to contribute to the discussion on how to increase donation rates. Methods: A self-administered discrete choice experiment (DCE) was applied. Respondents were repeatedly asked to choose between hypothetical blood donation centers. In case of reluctance to receiving incentives a none-option was included. Random parameter logit (RPL) and latent class models (LCM) were used for analysis. Results: The study sample included 416 college students from the US and Germany. Choice decisions were significantly influenced by the characteristics of the donation center in the DCE. Incentives most preferred were monetary compensation, paid leave, and blood screening test. LCM identified subgroups with preference heterogeneity. Small subgroups indicated moderate to strong aversion to incentives. Conclusion: The majority of the sample positively responded to incentives and indicated a willingness to accept incentives. In face of future challenges, the judicious use and appropriate utilization of incentives might be an option to motivate potential donors and should be open to discussion.

The Probabilistic Efficiency Frontier: A Framework for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Germany Put into Practice for Hepatitis C Treatment Options.

BACKGROUND: The German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen) adapted the efficiency frontier (EF) approach to conform to statutory provisions on cost-effectiveness analysis of health technologies. EF serves as a framework for evaluating cost-effectiveness and indirectly for pricing and reimbursement decisions. OBJECTIVES: To calculate an EF on the basis of single multidimensional benefit by taking patient preferences and uncertainty into account; to evaluate whether EF is useful to inform decision makers about cost-effectiveness of new therapies; and to find whether a treatment is efficient at given prices demonstrated through a case study on chronic hepatitis C. METHODS: A single multidimensional benefit was calculated by linear additive aggregation of multiple patient-relevant end points. End points were identified and weighted by patients in a previous discrete-choice experiment (DCE). Aggregation of overall benefit was ascertained using preferences and clinical data. Monte-Carlo simulation was applied. Uncertainty was addressed by price acceptability curve (PAC) and net monetary benefit (NMB). RESULTS: The case study illustrates that progress in benefit and efficiency of hepatitis C virus treatments could be depicted very well with the EF. On the basis of cost, effect, and preference data, the latest generations of interferon-free treatments are shown to yield a positive NMB and be efficient at current prices. CONCLUSIONS: EF was implemented taking uncertainty into account. For the first time, a DCE was used with the EF. The study shows how DCEs in combination with EF, PAC, and NMB can contribute important information in the course of reimbursement and pricing decisions.

First and Foremost Battle the Virus: Eliciting Patient Preferences in Antiviral Therapy for Hepatitis C Using a Discrete Choice Experiment.

BACKGROUND: There has been tremendous progress regarding treatment options for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Several interferon-free regimens are awaiting regulatory approval. These innovations promise substantial reductions in the burden of disease and side effects as well as a decrease in treatment duration. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this quantitaitive study was to elicit patient preferences for attributes of innovative antiviral therapies for hepatitis C. METHODS: A systematic literature search and 14 semi-structured interviews were performed, resulting in eight patient-relevant characteristics. For the discrete choice experiment, an experimental design (3×3 + 5×6) was generated using Ngene software. The survey was conducted in August 2014 through computer-assisted personal interviews. The data were effects-coded in a random parameter logit estimation. RESULTS: Participants were patients with HCV (N = 561; 58.1% men) in different treatment states. The analysis revealed a predominance of the attribute "reaching sustained virological response." When considering confidence intervals, the results showed three different preference ranks. At first place was "sustained virological response" (level difference [LD] 3.98), second was "anemia" (LD 1.10), followed by "number of interferon injections" (LD 0.92), "rash" (LD 0.82), "nausea and/or diarrhea" (LD 0.79), and "duration of antiviral therapy" (LD 0.78). The last position was occupied by both "tiredness/fatigue" (LD 0.31) and "headache" (LD 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: From the patients' point of view, sustained virological response is the most essential criterion for choosing an HCV therapy. It was ranked at the highest, dominating all side effects and modes of administration. Furthermore, this study proved that patients consider both the probability of occurrence and the severity of treatment-induced side effects. Results clearly point to valuation of probabilities that is separate from that of severity.

Patient-Focused Benefit-Risk Analysis to Inform Regulatory Decisions: The European Union Perspective.

Regulatory decisions are often based on multiple clinical end points, but the perspectives used to judge the relative importance of those end points are predominantly those of expert decision makers rather than of the patient. However, there is a growing awareness that active patient and public participation can improve decision making, increase acceptance of decisions, and improve adherence to treatments. The assessment of risk versus benefit requires not only information on clinical outcomes but also value judgments about which outcomes are important and whether the potential benefits outweigh the harms. There are a number of mechanisms for capturing the input of patients, and regulatory bodies within the European Union are participating in several initiatives. These can include patients directly participating in the regulatory decision-making process or using information derived from patients in empirical studies as part of the evidence considered. One promising method that is being explored is the elicitation of "patient preferences." Preferences, in this context, refer to the individual's evaluation of health outcomes and can be understood as statements regarding the relative desirability of a range of treatment options, treatment characteristics, and health states. Several methods for preference measurement have been proposed, and pilot studies have been undertaken to use patient preference information in regulatory decision making. This article describes how preferences are currently being considered in the benefit-risk assessment context, and shows how different methods of preference elicitation are used to support decision making within the European context.

Do You Want to Hear the Bad News? The Value of Diagnostic Tests for Alzheimer's Disease.

OBJECTIVE: The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) remains difficult. Lack of diagnostic certainty or possible distress related to a positive result from diagnostic testing could limit the application of new testing technologies. The objective of this paper is to quantify respondents' preferences for obtaining AD diagnostic tests and to estimate the perceived value of AD test information. METHODS: Discrete-choice experiment and contingent-valuation questions were administered to respondents in Germany and the United Kingdom. Choice data were analyzed by using random-parameters logit. A probit model characterized respondents who were not willing to take a test. RESULTS: Most respondents indicated a positive value for AD diagnostic test information. Respondents who indicated an interest in testing preferred brain imaging without the use of radioactive markers. German respondents had relatively lower money-equivalent values for test features compared with respondents in the United Kingdom. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents preferred less invasive diagnostic procedures and tests with higher accuracy and expressed a willingness to pay up to €700 to receive a less invasive test with the highest accuracy.

TREATMENT AFTER ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME: ANALYSIS OF PATIENT'S PRIORITIES WITH ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease is one of the most common causes of death worldwide, with many individuals having experienced acute coronary syndrome (ACS). How patients with a history of ACS value aspects of their medical treatment have been evaluated rarely. The aim of this study was to determine patient priorities for long-term drug therapy after experiencing ACS. METHODS: To identify patient-relevant treatment characteristics, a systematic literature review and qualitative patient interviews were conducted. A questionnaire was developed to elicit patient's priorities for different characteristics of ACS treatment using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). To evaluate the patient-relevant outcomes, the eigenvector method was applied. RESULTS: Six-hundred twenty-three patients participated in the computer-assisted personal interviews and were included in the final analysis. Patients showed a clear priority for the attribute "reduction of mortality risk" (weight: 0.402). The second most preferred attribute was the "prevention of a new myocardial infarction" (weight: 0.272), followed by "side effect: dyspnea" (weight: 0.165) and "side effect: bleeding" (weight: 0.117). The "frequency of intake" was the least important attribute (weight: 0.044). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this study shows that patients strongly value a reduction of the mortality risk in post-ACS treatment. Formal consideration of patient preferences and priorities can help to inform a patient-centered approach, clinical practice, development of future effective therapies, and health policy for decision makers that best represents the needs and goals of the patient.