A multiple stakeholder multicriteria decision analysis in diabetic macular edema management: the MULTIDEX‑EMD study
Multiple stakeholder
Diabetic macular edema management
Issue Date: 
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
de-Andrés‑Nogales, F. (Fernando); Casado, M. (Miguel); Trillo, J.L. (José Luis); et al. "A multiple stakeholder multicriteria decision analysis in diabetic macular edema management: the MULTIDEX‑EMD study". PharmacoEconomics - Open. 4, 2020, 615 - 624
Background The clinical and economic management of retinal diseases has become more complex following the introduction of new intravitreal treatments. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) ofers the potential to overcome the challenges associated with traditional decision-making tools. Objectives A MCDA to determine the most relevant criteria to decision-making in the management of diabetic macular edema (DME) based on the perspectives of multiple stakeholders in Spain was developed. This MCDA was termed the MULTIDEX-EMD study. Methods Nineteen stakeholders (7 physicians, 4 pharmacists, 5 health authorities and health management experts, 1 psychologist, and 2 patient representatives) participated in this three-phase project. In phase A, an advisory board defned all of the criteria that could infuence DME treatment decision-making. These criteria were then screened using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) (phase B). Next, a multinomial logit model was ftted by applying the backward elimination algorithm (relevant criteria: p value<0.05). Finally, the results were discussed in a deliberative process (phase C). Results Thirty-one criteria were initially defned (phase A) and grouped into 5 categories: efcacy/efectiveness, safety, organizational and economic impact, patient-reported outcomes, and other therapeutic features. The DCE results (phase B) showed that 10 criteria were relevant to the decision-making process for a 50- to 65-year-old DME patient: mean change in best corrected visual acuity (p value<0.001), percentage of patients with an improvement of ≥15 letters (p value<0.001), efect duration per administration (p value=0.008), retinal detachment (p value<0.001), endophthalmitis (p value=0.012), myocardial infarction (p value<0.001), intravitreal hemorrhage (p value=0.021), annual treatment cost per patient (p value=0.001), health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (p value=0.004), and disability level (p value=0.021). Conclusions From a multi-stakeholder perspective, the selection of an appropriate treatment for DME patients should guarantee patient safety and maximize the visual acuity improvement and treatment efect duration. It should also contribute to system sustainability by being afordable, it should have a positive impact on HRQoL, and it should prevent disability.

Files in This Item:
725.08 kB
Adobe PDF

Statistics and impact
0 citas en
0 citas en

Items in Dadun are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.