IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v17y2024i6d10.1007_s40271-024-00714-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stated Preferences of At-Risk Populations for the Treatment of Osteoporosis: A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Eva-Lotta Hinzpeter

    (Maastricht University)

  • Lakshmi Nagendra

    (Maastricht University
    JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research)

  • Nadja Kairies-Schwarz

    (Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf
    Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research at Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf)

  • Charlotte Beaudart

    (University of Namur)

  • Mickaël Hiligsmann

    (Maastricht University)

Abstract

Introduction Poor adherence to anti-osteoporosis treatment is a well-recognized problem, partly due to misalignment with patient preferences. In recent years, several quantitative preference studies have been conducted. This study aimed to systematically review stated preference research to provide a comprehensive overview of patient preferences in osteoporosis, in particular on conditional relative attribute importance and preference heterogeneity. Methods This systematic review was conducted in MEDLINE and Embase up to February 29th, 2024. It includes all English-language, peer-reviewed, stated preference articles related to osteoporosis management and treatment in patients with or at risk of osteoporosis. Conditional relative importance of attributes as well as heterogeneity was assessed, and attributes classified into outcome, process, and cost attributes. Quality assessment was performed using a combined checklist of Purpose, Respondents, Explanation, Findings, and Significance (PREFS) and International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) items. Results Fourteen studies including 4714 participants were evaluated. Attributes were mostly classified as process related (50%) and outcome related (40%), both of which significantly influence patient preferences. In pairwise attribute comparison, efficacy was dominant over cost, administration, and side-effects. Preference heterogeneity was observed in the majority of studies (86%). Quality assessment indicated an overall improvement in study quality over time, with recent studies adhering more closely to established methodological standards. Conclusions The findings highlight the importance of considering patient preferences in the management of osteoporosis, underscoring the need for a patient-centered approach. The readiness of patients to engage in trade-offs between attributes suggests that healthcare providers should ensure treatments are aligned with individual patient preferences to improve adherence and optimize outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Eva-Lotta Hinzpeter & Lakshmi Nagendra & Nadja Kairies-Schwarz & Charlotte Beaudart & Mickaël Hiligsmann, 2024. "Stated Preferences of At-Risk Populations for the Treatment of Osteoporosis: A Systematic Review," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 17(6), pages 619-634, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:17:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s40271-024-00714-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-024-00714-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-024-00714-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-024-00714-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:17:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s40271-024-00714-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.