Evidence Hub

Evaluating Patient Preferences in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Treatment Using Conjoint Analysis

Phillip J. Huffman, Edward Yin, Andrew J. Cohen

Urology, 2022

1,235 participants · 13 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To quantify BPH patient preferences to promote guidelines-compliant, patient-centered care. Discordance between patient and urologist priorities for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) hinders patient-centered care. Physician assumptions regarding patient preferences lead to dissatisfied patients; a poor outcome in any quality of life surgery. American Urologic Association guidelines urge urologists to consider patient preferences when recommending a BPH treatment.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional, online survey study using researchmatch.org, participants were required to decide between theoretical BPH treatments in a balanced, choice-based conjoint analysis. The treatments had varying levels of four attributes: efficacy, recovery difficulty, risk of complications (Clavien-Dindo 2+), and risk of de novo ejaculatory dysfunction. Demographic information and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) were collected and analyzed using comparative statistics. Each attribute was analyzed using a conditional logit model, and attribute importance (range in utility between attribute-levels) was calculated.

RESULTS

Out of 1235 recruited participants, 812 (66%) completed the study. Median IPSS and age was 6 (IQR 3-12) and 56 (IQR 38-67), respectively. Complication risk was the most important attribute, followed by efficacy, recovery difficulty, and risk of ejaculatory dysfunction. In a subgroup analysis of age quartiles, participants age 67 held efficacy (31%)…

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free