Time filter

Source Type

Rabenda V.,Epidemiology and Health Economics | Reginster J.-Y.,Epidemiology and Health Economics
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research | Year: 2010

Nonadherence to pharmacological treatment in osteoporosis is a well-recognized problem. As in other chronic diseases, adherence to osteoporosis treatment is poor, resulting in enormous burden on patients and healthcare resources. Most importantly, low adherence rates consistently result in increased rates of fractures. However, it seems that efforts to evaluate and improve rates of both compliance and persistence are increasing. The extension of dosing intervals may be an element, among others, allowing improvements in therapeutic adherence. Improved patient education, enhancing healthcare provider-patients interaction, taking into account patients preferences and involving them in treatment decisions may improve adherence. © 2010 Expert Reviews Ltd. Source

Berchi C.,French Institute of Health and Medical Research | Degieux P.,Leopold Bellan Hospital | Halhol H.,Expanscience | Danel B.,Expanscience | And 2 more authors.
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice | Year: 2016

Objectives In the European context of falling reimbursement rates for some osteoarthritis (OA) treatments, we performed a study to determine whether the cost covered by patients influenced the decisions of their physicians' prescriptions for medication. Methods The study involved 106 general practitioners (GPs) and 82 rheumatologists. Preferences were elicited using a discrete choice experiment. Scenarios were generated including seven treatment attributes with associated different levels: pain relief, improvement in function, retardation of joint degradation, risk of moderate side effects, risk of serious side effects, cost borne by the patient and degree of patient acceptance of the treatment. Key findings OA treatment choices were significantly influenced by pain relief (β = 1.1533, P < 0.0001 for GPs and β = 0.5043, P = 0.0024 for rheumatologists), improvement in function (β = 1.2140 for GPs and β = 0.7192 for rheumatologists, P < 0.0001), annual cost to the patient (β = -0.0054 for GPs and β = -0.0038 for rheumatologists, P < 0.0001) and serious side effects (β = -0.5524 for GPs and β = -0.4268 for rheumatologists, P < 0.0001). The risk of moderate side effects only had an impact on GP decision making (β = 0.0282, P = 0.0028). All physicians were willing to make patients bear an extra annual cost of: (1) €225 among GPs and €189 among rheumatologists so that they could benefit from one unit improvement in function; and (2) €214 among GPs and €133 among rheumatologists so that they could benefit from a one unit improvement in pain relief. Conclusion When making decisions about which treatment to prescribe, physicians take into account the cost to patients. Changes in reimbursement rates for some OA treatments may lead to changes in prescribing practices. © 2015 Royal Pharmaceutical Society. Source

Discover hidden collaborations