The Best of Both Worlds: An Example Mixed Methods Approach to Understand Men’s Preferences for the Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms

Divine Ikenwilo, Sebastian Heidenreich (), Mandy Ryan, Colette Mankowski, Jameel Nazir and Verity Watson
Additional contact information
Divine Ikenwilo: University of Aberdeen
Sebastian Heidenreich: University of Aberdeen
Mandy Ryan: University of Aberdeen
Colette Mankowski: Astellas Pharma EMEA
Jameel Nazir: Astellas Pharma EMEA

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2018, vol. 11, issue 1, No 6, 55-67

Abstract: Abstract Background Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are widely used to quantify individuals’ preferences for healthcare. Guidelines recommend the design of DCEs should be informed by qualitative research. However, only a few studies go beyond guidelines by fully presenting qualitative and quantitative research jointly together in a mixed methods approach (MMA). Objectives Using an example study about men’s preferences for medical treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), we demonstrate how qualitative research can complement DCEs to gain a rich understanding of individuals’ preferences. Methods We were the first to combine online discussion groups (ODGs) with an online DCE. A thematic analysis of the ODGs and a conceptual map provided insights into men’s quality of life (QoL) with LUTS and relevant treatment attitudes. This was used to design the DCE. Men’s willingness to pay (WTP) for these attributes was estimated. Findings from ODGs and DCE were compared to understand WTP and preference heterogeneity. Key findings Men mostly valued medicine that reduced urgency and night-time frequencies of urination but avoided sexual side effects. We find heterogeneity in the effect of sexual side effects on men’s preferences. The ODGs suggest this is because several men may be sexually inactive due to their age, being widowed or having comorbidities. The ODGs also raised concern about men’s awareness of LUTS. Conclusion We argue that the insights gained into men’s preferences for treatment and how LUTS affects men’s QoL could not have been obtained by either the qualitative research or the DCE alone.

Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-017-0263-7 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:patien:v:11:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s40271-017-0263-7

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40271

DOI: 10.1007/s40271-017-0263-7

Access Statistics for this article

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research is currently edited by Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research from Springer, International Academy of Health Preference Research
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().