How important is mode of administration in treatments for rheumatic diseases and related conditions?

Nick Bansback, Logan Trenaman, Mark Harrison

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    Many new drugs do not offer clinical benefits over existing treatments but provide potentially more convenient modes of administration. These include how frequently a treatment is given, how it is delivered, who gives the treatment, and whether there are any associated local adverse reactions. We reviewed studies in rheumatology that ask patients and society the value they assign to these aspects of treatment in comparison to the benefits and side effects and costs. We find that mode of administration is generally valued by both patients and society, but the extent depends on the context of the disease and the study participants. Respondents with a more severe disease seem to assign less value to mode and frequency of administration, and prioritize improvement in pain and function. However, patients with chronic, but less severe, disease seem to place greater value on mode of administration. Furthermore, respondents with experience of the treatments perceived to be more inconvenient assigned lower value to more convenient treatments. Unfortunately, we found few examples of studies that reported values in a format that could easily be incorporated into resource allocation decisions by payers.
    Original languageEnglish
    JournalCurrent Rheumatology Reports
    Volume17
    Issue number6
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Jun 2015

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'How important is mode of administration in treatments for rheumatic diseases and related conditions?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this