TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinician preferences for neurotechnologies in pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy
T2 - A discrete choice experiment
AU - Apantaku, Glory O.
AU - McDonald, Patrick J.
AU - Aguiar, Magda
AU - Cabrera, Laura Y.
AU - Chiong, Winston
AU - Connolly, Mary B.
AU - Hrincu, Viorica
AU - Ibrahim, George M.
AU - Kaal, K. Julia
AU - Lawson, Ashley
AU - Naftel, Robert
AU - Racine, Eric
AU - Safari, Abdollah
AU - Harrison, Mark
AU - Illes, Judy
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) BRAIN Initiative on Neuroethics [RF1 # MH117805 01; JI, Principal Investigator; PJM, co‐Principal Investigator]. JI is a Distinguished University Scholar and UBC Distinguished Scholar in Neuroethics. PJM was the Alcan Chair in Neurosciences at UBC during the course of this work. MH is supported by a Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research Scholar Award (16813). ER receives salary support from the Fonds de recherche du Québec – Santé. LC is a Dorothy Foehr Huck and J. Lloyd Huck Chair in Neuroethics at Pennsylvania State University.
Funding Information:
This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) BRAIN Initiative on Neuroethics [RF1 # MH117805 01; JI, Principal Investigator; PJM, co-Principal Investigator]. JI is a Distinguished University Scholar and UBC Distinguished Scholar in Neuroethics. PJM was the Alcan Chair in Neurosciences at UBC during the course of this work. MH is supported by a Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research Scholar Award (16813). ER receives salary support from the Fonds de recherche du Québec – Santé. LC is a Dorothy Foehr Huck and J. Lloyd Huck Chair in Neuroethics at Pennsylvania State University.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors. Epilepsia published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy.
PY - 2022/9
Y1 - 2022/9
N2 - Objective: Novel and minimally invasive neurotechnologies offer the potential to reduce the burden of epilepsy while avoiding the risks of conventional resective surgery. Few neurotechnologies have been tested in randomized controlled trials with pediatric populations, leaving clinicians to face decisions about whether to recommend these treatments with insufficient evidence about the relevant risks and benefits. This study specifically explores the preferences of clinicians for treating pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) with novel neurotechnologies. Methods: A discrete-choice experiment (DCE) was designed to elicit the preferences of clinicians with experience in treating children with DRE using novel neurotechnological interventions. The preferences for six key attributes used when making treatment decisions (chances of clinically significant improvement in seizures, major and minor risks from intervention, availability of evidence, financial burden for the family, and access to the intervention) were estimated using a conditional logit model. The estimates from this model were then used to predict the adoption of existing novel neurotechnological interventions. Results: Sixty-eight clinicians completed the survey: 33 neurosurgeons, 28 neurologists, and 7 other clinicians. Most clinicians were working in the United States (74%), and the remainder (26%) in Canada. All attributes, apart from the nearest location with access to the intervention, influenced preferences significantly. The chance of clinically significant improvement in seizures was the most positive influence on clinician preferences, but low-quality evidence and a higher risk of major complications could offset these preferences. Of the existing neurotechnological interventions, vagus nerve stimulation was predicted to have the highest likelihood of adoption; deep brain stimulation had the lowest likelihood of adoption. Significance: The preferences of clinicians are drive primarily by the likelihood of achieving seizure freedom for their patients, but preferences for an intervention are largely eradicated if only low quality of evidence supporting the intervention is available. Until better evidence supporting the use of potentially effective, novel neurotechnologies becomes available, clinicians are likely to prefer more established treatments.
AB - Objective: Novel and minimally invasive neurotechnologies offer the potential to reduce the burden of epilepsy while avoiding the risks of conventional resective surgery. Few neurotechnologies have been tested in randomized controlled trials with pediatric populations, leaving clinicians to face decisions about whether to recommend these treatments with insufficient evidence about the relevant risks and benefits. This study specifically explores the preferences of clinicians for treating pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) with novel neurotechnologies. Methods: A discrete-choice experiment (DCE) was designed to elicit the preferences of clinicians with experience in treating children with DRE using novel neurotechnological interventions. The preferences for six key attributes used when making treatment decisions (chances of clinically significant improvement in seizures, major and minor risks from intervention, availability of evidence, financial burden for the family, and access to the intervention) were estimated using a conditional logit model. The estimates from this model were then used to predict the adoption of existing novel neurotechnological interventions. Results: Sixty-eight clinicians completed the survey: 33 neurosurgeons, 28 neurologists, and 7 other clinicians. Most clinicians were working in the United States (74%), and the remainder (26%) in Canada. All attributes, apart from the nearest location with access to the intervention, influenced preferences significantly. The chance of clinically significant improvement in seizures was the most positive influence on clinician preferences, but low-quality evidence and a higher risk of major complications could offset these preferences. Of the existing neurotechnological interventions, vagus nerve stimulation was predicted to have the highest likelihood of adoption; deep brain stimulation had the lowest likelihood of adoption. Significance: The preferences of clinicians are drive primarily by the likelihood of achieving seizure freedom for their patients, but preferences for an intervention are largely eradicated if only low quality of evidence supporting the intervention is available. Until better evidence supporting the use of potentially effective, novel neurotechnologies becomes available, clinicians are likely to prefer more established treatments.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85133134072&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85133134072&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/epi.17328
DO - 10.1111/epi.17328
M3 - Article
C2 - 35699675
AN - SCOPUS:85133134072
SN - 0013-9580
JO - Epilepsia
JF - Epilepsia
ER -