Adolescent and Parent Preferences for Hypodontia: Discrete Choice Experiment

被引:4
作者
Barber, S. [1 ]
Bekker, H. [2 ]
Marti, J. [3 ]
Pavitt, S. [4 ]
Khambay, B. [5 ]
Meads, D. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Leeds, Sch Dent, Orthodont Dept, Level 6 Worsley Bldg,Clarendon Way, Leeds LS2 9LU, W Yorkshire, England
[2] Leeds Inst Hlth Sci, Leeds, W Yorkshire, England
[3] Univ Lausanne CHUV, Inst Social & Prevent Med IUMSP, Lausanne, Switzerland
[4] Sch Dent, Leeds, W Yorkshire, England
[5] Univ Birmingham, Sch Dent, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
child dentistry; clinical outcomes; orthodontic(s); patient outcomes; restorative dentistry; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; CHILDREN; IMPACT; CARE;
D O I
10.1177/00220345221111386
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Choosing hypodontia treatment requires young people and parents to consider a large amount of information, identify what is important to them, and make trade-offs between options. This study aimed to examine young people and parents' preferences for hypodontia treatment using discrete choice experiment (DCE). This was a cross-sectional survey of young people (12-16 y) with hypodontia of any severity, at any stage of treatment, and their parents. Participants were recruited from NHS Hospitals in England and Wales. A bespoke DCE questionnaire was developed to measure preferences for 6 attributes of hypodontia treatment (waiting time, treatment time, problems during treatment, discomfort during treatment, bite, appearance). The questionnaire was completed 1) online by young people and parents, individually or together, and 2) by child-parent dyads under observation. Preferences were analyzed using regression models. In total, 204 participants (122 young people, 56 parents, 26 dyads) completed the online questionnaire and 15 child-parent dyads completed the questionnaire under observation. The most important attribute in hypodontia treatment was improvement in appearance, but significant heterogeneity was found in preferences. Four distinct groups of participants were found: group 1 (39%): severe discomfort and problems were most important; group 2 (31%): most concerned about improvement in appearance of teeth and improvement in bite; group 3 (22%): appearance 3 times more important than any other attribute; and group 4 (9%): preferences difficult to interpret. There was variation in how child-parent dyads approached decision-making, with some negotiating joint preferences, while for others, one individual dominated. Making trade-offs in DCE tasks helped some people think about treatment and identify their preferences. Appearance is an important outcome from hypodontia treatment, but preferences vary and potential risks and functional outcome are also important to some people. There is a notable level of uncertainty in decision-making, which suggests further shared decision support would be valuable.
引用
收藏
页码:1590 / 1596
页数:7
相关论文
共 31 条
  • [1] Development of a condition-specific measure to assess quality of life in patients with hypodontia
    Akram, A. J.
    Jerreat, A. S.
    Woodford, J.
    Sandy, J. R.
    Ireland, A. J.
    [J]. ORTHODONTICS & CRANIOFACIAL RESEARCH, 2011, 14 (03) : 160 - 167
  • [2] Development of a Discrete-Choice Experiment (DCE) to Elicit Adolescent and Parent Preferences for Hypodontia Treatment
    Barber, Sophy
    Bekker, Hilary
    Marti, Joachim
    Pavitt, Sue
    Khambay, Balvinder
    Meads, David
    [J]. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2019, 12 (01) : 137 - 148
  • [3] Identification and appraisal of outcome measures used to evaluate hypodontia care: A systematic review
    Barber, Sophy
    Bekker, Hilary L.
    Meads, David
    Pavitt, Sue
    Khambay, Balvinder
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2018, 153 (02) : 184 - +
  • [4] An Analytical Framework for Joint vs Separate Decisions by Couples in Choice Experiments: The Case of Coastal Water Quality in Tobago
    Beharry-Borg, Nesha
    Hensher, David A.
    Scarpa, Riccardo
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL & RESOURCE ECONOMICS, 2009, 43 (01) : 95 - 117
  • [5] Bray Nathan, 2016, Pilot Feasibility Stud, V2, P32
  • [6] How to routinely collect data on patient-reported outcome and experience measures in renal registries in Europe: an expert consensus meeting
    Breckenridge, Kate
    Bekker, Hillary L.
    Gibbons, Elizabeth
    van der Veer, Sabine N.
    Abbott, Denise
    Briancon, Serge
    Cullen, Ron
    Garneata, Liliana
    Jager, Kitty J.
    Lonning, Kjersti
    Metcalfe, Wendy
    Morton, Rachael L.
    Murtagh, Fliss E. M.
    Prutz, Karl
    Robertson, Susan
    Rychlik, Ivan
    Schon, Steffan
    Sharp, Linda
    Speyer, Elodie
    Tentori, Francesca
    Caskey, Fergus J.
    [J]. NEPHROLOGY DIALYSIS TRANSPLANTATION, 2015, 30 (10) : 1605 - 1614
  • [7] Conjoint Analysis Applications in Health-a Checklist: A Report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force
    Bridges, John F. P.
    Hauber, A. Brett
    Marshall, Deborah
    Lloyd, Andrew
    Prosser, Lisa A.
    Regier, Dean A.
    Johnson, F. Reed
    Mauskopf, Josephine
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2011, 14 (04) : 403 - 413
  • [8] Mothers' preferences and willingness to pay for vaccinating daughters against human papillomavirus
    Brown, Derek S.
    Johnson, F. Reed
    Poulos, Christine
    Messonnier, Mark L.
    [J]. VACCINE, 2010, 28 (07) : 1702 - 1708
  • [9] Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Review of the Literature
    Clark, Michael D.
    Determann, Domino
    Petrou, Stavros
    Moro, Domenico
    de Bekker-Grob, Esther W.
    [J]. PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2014, 32 (09) : 883 - 902
  • [10] Using qualitative methods for attribute development for discrete choice experiments: issues and recommendations
    Coast, Joanna
    Al-Janabi, Hareth
    Sutton, Eileen J.
    Horrocks, Susan A.
    Vosper, A. Jane
    Swancutt, Dawn R.
    Flynn, Terry N.
    [J]. HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2012, 21 (06) : 730 - 741