Advanced search
Publication Cover
Expert Review of Medical Devices Volume 11, 2014 - Issue 1
Submit an article Journal homepage
342
Views
11
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Special Reports

Parent preference in Switzerland for easy-to-use attributes of growth hormone injection devices quantified by willingness to pay

Udo MeinhardtGrowth Clinic, PEZZ Center for Pediatric Endocrinology Zurich, Moehrlistrasse 69, Zurich, SwitzerlandCorrespondence[email protected]
,
Urs EiholzerGrowth Clinic, PEZZ Center for Pediatric Endocrinology Zurich, Moehrlistrasse 69, Zurich, Switzerland
,
Lisa SeitzRegional Health Economics Analyst, Novo Nordisk Pharma GmbH, Brucknerstrasse 1, Mainz, Rhineland-Palati 55127, Germany
,
Mette BøgelundIncentive, Holte Stationsvej 14, 1. DK-2840 Holte, Denmark
&
Anne-Marie KappelgaardMedical Affairs, Novo Nordisk A/S, Vandtårnsvej 108-110, Søborg, Gladsaxe DK-2860, Dennmark
Pages 31-38 | Published online: 02 Dec 2013

References

  • Hardin DS, Kemp SF, Allen DB. Twenty years of recombinant human growth hormone in children: relevance to pediatric care providers. Clin. Pediatr. (Phila.) 46(4), 279–286 (2007).
  • Cutfield WS, Derraik JG, Gunn AJ et al. Non-compliance with growth hormone treatment in children is common and impairs linear growth. PLoS ONE 6(1), e16223 (2011).
  • Hamilton JG. Needle phobia: a neglected diagnosis. J. Fam. Pract. 41(2), 169–175 (1995).
  • Kapoor RR, Burke SA, Sparrow SE et al. Monitoring of concordance in growth hormone therapy. Arch. Dis. Child. 93(2), 147–148 (2008).
  • Rosenfeld RG, Bakker B. Compliance and persistence in pediatric and adult patients receiving growth hormone therapy. Endocr. Pract. 14(2), 143–154 (2008).
  • Haverkamp F, Johansson L, Dumas H et al. Observations of nonadherence to recombinant human growth hormone therapy in clinical practice. Clin. Ther. 30(2), 307–316 (2008).
  • Norgren S. Adherence remains a challenge for patients receiving growth hormone therapy. Pediatr. Endocrinol. Rev. 6( Suppl. 4), 545–548 (2009).
  • Fidotti E. A history of growth hormone injection devices. J. Pediatr. Endocrinol. Metab. 14(5), 497–501 (2001).
  • Acerini C, Albanese A, Casey A et al. Initiating growth hormone therapy for children and adolescents. Br. J. Nurs. 21(18), 1091–1097 (2012).
  • Dunn JD, Nickman NA. Indications for recombinant human growth hormone and evaluation of available recombinant human growth hormone devices: implications for managed care organizations. Am. J. Manag. Care. 17( Suppl. 18), eS16–eS22 (2011).
  • Wickramasuriya BP, Casey A, Akhtar S et al. Factors determining patient choice of device for GH therapy. Horm. Res. 65(1), 18–22 (2006).
  • Kirk J. Improving adherence to GH therapy with an electronic device: first experience with easypod. Pediatr. Endocrinol. Rev. 6( Suppl. 4), 549–552 (2009).
  • Ryan M, Gerard K. Using discrete choice experiments to value health care programmes: current practice and future research reflections. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy 2(1), 55–64 (2003).
  • Regier DA, Diorio C, Ethier MC et al. Discrete choice experiment to evaluate factors that influence preferences for antibiotic prophylaxis in pediatric oncology. PLoS ONE 7(10), e47470 (2012).
  • Glenngård AH, Hjelmgren J, Thomsen PH, Tvedten T. Patient preferences and willingness-to-pay for ADHD treatment with stimulants using discrete choice experiment (DCE) in Sweden, Denmark and Norway. Nord. J. Psychiatry 67(5), 351–359 (2013).
  • Poulos C, Yang JC, Levin C, Van Minh H, Giang KB, Nguyen D. Mothers’ preferences and willingness to pay for HPV vaccines in Vinh Long Province, Vietnam. Soc. Sci. Med. 73(2), 226–234 (2011).
  • Bridges JF, Hauber AB, Marshall D et al. Conjoint analysis applications in health--a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health 14(4), 403–413 (2011).
  • de Bekker-Grob EW, Ryan M, Gerard K. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Health Econ. 21(2), 145–172 (2012).
  • Ryan M, Farrar S. Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ 320(7248), 1530–1533 (2000).
  • Kuhfeld W. Marketing Research Methods in SAS: Experimental Design, Choice, Conjoint, and Graphical Techniques. SAS Institute Inc., NC, USA (2010).
  • Ryan M, Hughes J. Using conjoint analysis to assess women’s preferences for miscarriage management. Health Econ. 6(3), 261–273 (1997).
  • Lancaster K. Consumer Demand: A New Approach. Columbia Studies in Economics No. 5. Columbia University Press, New York, USA (1971).
  • Barker N. A Practical Introduction to the Bootstrap Using the SAS System. Oxford Pharmaceutical Sciences, Wallingford, UK (2005).
  • van Dongen N, Kaptein AA. Parents’ views on growth hormone treatment for their children: psychosocial issues. Patient Prefer. Adherence 6, 547–553 (2012).
  • Kremidas D, Wisniewski T, Divino VM et al. Administration burden associated with recombinant human growth hormone treatment: perspectives of patients and caregivers. J. Pediatr. Nurs. 28(1), 55–63 (2013).
  • Ahmed SF, Smith WA, Blamires C. Facilitating and understanding the family’s choice of injection device for growth hormone therapy by using conjoint analysis. Arch. Dis. Child. 93(2), 110–114 (2008).
  • Dumas H, Panayiotopoulos P, Parker D, Pongpairochana V. Understanding and meeting the needs of those using growth hormone injection devices. BMC Endocr. Disord. 6, 5 (2006).
  • Dahlgren J, Veimo D, Johansson L, Bech I. Patient acceptance of a novel electronic auto-injector device to administer recombinant human growth hormone: results from an open-label, user survey of everyday use. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 23(7), 1649–1655 (2007).
  • Fuchs GS, Mikkelsen S, Knudsen TK, Kappelgaard AM. Ease of use and acceptability of a new pen device for the administration of growth hormone therapy in pediatric patients: an open-label, uncontrolled usability test. Clin. Ther. 31(12), 2906–2914 (2009).
  • Shine B, Musial W, Owens L, Deeb L, Luetjen T, Howard C. Patient and parent preference for growth hormone products. Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm. 60 (1), 89–90 (2003).
  • Tauber M, Payen C, Cartault A, Jouret B, Edouard T, Roger D. User trial of Easypod, an electronic autoinjector for growth hormone. Ann. Endocrinol. (Paris) 69(6), 511–516 (2008).
  • Dörr HG, Zabransky S, Keller E et al. Are needle-free injections a useful alternative for growth hormone therapy in children? Safety and pharmacokinetics of growth hormone delivered by a new needle-free injection device compared to a fine gauge needle. J. Pediatr. Endocrinol. Metab. 16(3), 383–392 (2003).
  • Pfützner A, Hartmann K, Winter F, Fuchs GS, Kappelgaard AM, Rohrer TR. Intuitiveness, ease of use, and preference of a prefilled growth hormone injection pen: a noninterventional, randomized, open-label, crossover, comparative usability study of three delivery devices in growth hormone-treated pediatric patients. Clin. Ther. 32(11), 1918–1934 (2010).
  • Desrosiers P, O’Brien F, Blethen S. Patient outcomes in the GHMonitor: the effect of delivery device on compliance and growth. Pediatr. Endocrinol. Rev. 2( Suppl. 3), 327–331 (2005).
  • Haverkamp F, Gasteyger C. A review of biopsychosocial strategies to prevent and overcome early-recognized poor adherence in growth hormone therapy of children. J. Med. Econ. 14(4), 448–457 (2011).
  • Osterberg L, Blaschke T. Adherence to medication. N. Engl. J. Med. 353(5), 487–497 (2005).
  • Yang ZJ, McComas KA, Gay GK, Leonard JP, Dannenberg AJ, Dillon H. Comparing decision making between cancer patients and the general population: thoughts, emotions, or social influence? J. Health Commun. 17(4), 477–494 (2012).
  • Brearley C, Priestley A, Leighton-Scott J, Christen M. Pharmacokinetics of recombinant human growth hormone administered by cool.click 2, a new needle-free device, compared with subcutaneous administration using a conventional syringe and needle. BMC Clin. Pharmacol. 7, 10 (2007).
  • Bozzola M, Colle M, Halldin-Stenlid M, Larroque S, Zignani M; easypod™ survey study group. Treatment adherence with the easypod™ growth hormone electronic auto-injector and patient acceptance: survey results from 824 children and their parents. BMC Endocr. Disord. 11, 4 (2011).
  • Oyarzabal M, Aliaga M, Chueca M, Echarte G, Ulied A. Multicentre survey on compliance with growth hormone therapy: what can be improved? Acta Paediatr. 87(4), 387–391 (1998).

Website

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Order Reprints Request Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

Request Academic Permissions

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.