COPD-treating nurses’ preferences for inhaler attributes – a discrete choice experiment

Abstract

Objective: To assess nurses’ preferences for various attributes of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) inhalation devices in order to obtain information about the relative importance of the different attributes and their assigned levels.

Methods: Data from a web-based questionnaire among Danish nurses who treat patients with COPD (accomplished in the spring/summer of 2015) was used. A total of 222 nurses completed the questionnaire which was based on discrete choice experiment (DCE) methodology. The probability of choosing an alternative from a number of choices in a discrete choice game was estimated by means of the conditional logit model.

Results: The two most important attributes according to the COPD-treating nurses were “Indicator when empty” and “Inspiratory flow rate”. In addition, the nurses considered the attribute “Obvious that dose is given” important. The three least-valued attributes were frequency of doses, whether the inhaler requires fine motor skills and whether it requires hand strength.

Conclusion: Inhalation devices can be classified into five categories, where the soft mist inhaler (SMI) includes the three most important attributes among its characteristics.

Limitations: The study sample size does not allow for subgroup analysis, which would have been valuable. The questionnaire design gives an indication of nurses’ preferences and it is assumed that these are similar to real life choices, but the current study cannot conclude on the nurses’ actual choices.

Keywords:

• Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
• inhalation devices
• inhalators
• nurses
• preferences

Note

Transparency

Declaration of funding

This particular work was sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim.

Declaration of financial/other relationships

M.B.A. has disclosed that he is employed by Boehringer Ingelheim during the conduct of the study and outside the submitted work. L.H. and M.B. have disclosed that they have received personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim during the conduct of the study.

CMRO peer reviewer 1 has disclosed the following relationships: advisory board member, recipient of speaker honoraria and consultancy fees for AstraZeneca/Almirall, Chiesi, Guidotti/Malesci, Novartis, Mundipharma, GSK, Sole24 Ore and Artsana. CMRO peer reviewer 2 has disclosed that he is on the speakers’ bureaus of Meda Pharmaceuticals and Thermo Fischer Diagnostics.

Notes

1. Respimat is a registered trade name of Boehringer Ingelheim, Germany