Willingness to Pay and Time Trade-off in Thai Patients with Port-Wine Stains.
port-wine stain
time trade-off
willingness to pay
Journal
ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR
ISSN: 1178-6981
Titre abrégé: Clinicoecon Outcomes Res
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101560564
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
27
07
2022
accepted:
08
09
2022
entrez:
29
9
2022
pubmed:
30
9
2022
medline:
30
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Port-wine stains are congenital vascular abnormalities that impact children's and parents' quality of life (QoL). There are currently no established criteria for assessing the quality of life in PWS patients. Utility measures such as willingness-to-pay (WTP) and time trade-off (TTO) can be used to quantify disease burden, impact on QoL, and assess the cost-effectiveness of interventions. This was a cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey study in Thailand from July 2021 to April 2022. The questionnaire included sociodemographic data and preference-based measurement, WTP and TTO. The primary outcome was a WTP and TTO for PWS laser treatment. The subsample analysis for the primary outcome was based on gender (male and female) and age (<5 years and ≥5 years). The household income was measured for time trade-off outcome. Out of 46 respondents, WTP for the base case at 40% improvement cost 6109.01 baht per visit. Patients were willing to spend their time 9.95 hours per visit for a clinical improvement of 40%. Female was willing to pay and spend more time than male, while those aged≥5 years were willing to pay and spend more time than those aged <5 years. High household income >100k per month willing to spend less time than lower income groups. There were obvious correlations between WTP and TTO with clinical outcomes. Utility indicators such as WTP and TTO can be used to measure disease burden, impact on QoL, and assess the cost-effectiveness of interventions. WTP and TTO could provide a more personalized approach to improving QoL, considering each patient's unique treatment plan and priority. This could help with patient uncertainty and long-term planning strategies to increase the QoL cost-effectively.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Port-wine stains are congenital vascular abnormalities that impact children's and parents' quality of life (QoL). There are currently no established criteria for assessing the quality of life in PWS patients. Utility measures such as willingness-to-pay (WTP) and time trade-off (TTO) can be used to quantify disease burden, impact on QoL, and assess the cost-effectiveness of interventions.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
This was a cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey study in Thailand from July 2021 to April 2022. The questionnaire included sociodemographic data and preference-based measurement, WTP and TTO. The primary outcome was a WTP and TTO for PWS laser treatment. The subsample analysis for the primary outcome was based on gender (male and female) and age (<5 years and ≥5 years). The household income was measured for time trade-off outcome.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Out of 46 respondents, WTP for the base case at 40% improvement cost 6109.01 baht per visit. Patients were willing to spend their time 9.95 hours per visit for a clinical improvement of 40%. Female was willing to pay and spend more time than male, while those aged≥5 years were willing to pay and spend more time than those aged <5 years. High household income >100k per month willing to spend less time than lower income groups.
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
There were obvious correlations between WTP and TTO with clinical outcomes. Utility indicators such as WTP and TTO can be used to measure disease burden, impact on QoL, and assess the cost-effectiveness of interventions. WTP and TTO could provide a more personalized approach to improving QoL, considering each patient's unique treatment plan and priority. This could help with patient uncertainty and long-term planning strategies to increase the QoL cost-effectively.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36171909
doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S382735
pii: 382735
pmc: PMC9512023
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
635-642Informations de copyright
© 2022 Jantarakolica et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest in relation to this work.
Références
Br J Dermatol. 2002 Mar;146(3):440-7
pubmed: 11952544
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Apr;76(4):695-702
pubmed: 27955934
Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2021 Apr;11(2):465-473
pubmed: 33481216
J Pediatr Psychol. 2013 Mar;38(2):162-72
pubmed: 23172874
Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24(11):1069-78
pubmed: 17067192
J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021 Jul;20(7):2203-2210
pubmed: 33949094
Br J Dermatol. 1989 Aug;121(2):209-15
pubmed: 2775645
Acta Derm Venereol. 2021 Aug 16;101(8):adv00516
pubmed: 34263327
J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2019 May;12(5):46-48
pubmed: 31320977
Lasers Med Sci. 1998 Dec;13(4):253-9
pubmed: 24710984
BMC Psychol. 2020 Aug 17;8(1):85
pubmed: 32807238
JAMA. 1996 Oct 9;276(14):1172-7
pubmed: 8827972
Acta Stomatol Croat. 2017 Dec;51(4):332-335
pubmed: 29872239
Lasers Surg Med. 2001;28(2):182-9
pubmed: 11241528
J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2018 Apr;20(2):77-84
pubmed: 29384394
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Nov 09;(11):CD007152
pubmed: 22071834
Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med. 2020 Apr 22;:
pubmed: 32320629
BMC Dermatol. 2011 Dec 19;11:16
pubmed: 22182399
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2020 Aug;20(4):331-342
pubmed: 32552002
J Pediatr Psychol. 1997 Aug;22(4):471-85
pubmed: 9302845
Lasers Surg Med. 2002;30(1):44-7
pubmed: 11857603
PLoS One. 2019 Nov 21;14(11):e0225454
pubmed: 31751389
Br J Plast Surg. 1997 Sep;50(6):463-7
pubmed: 9326151
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2019 Apr;33(4):700-708
pubmed: 30388318
Arch Dermatol Res. 2019 Apr;311(3):221-230
pubmed: 30788568