Presentation (CTI)

OBJECTIVES: To identify attributes and preferences of treatments for Parkinson’s Disease (PD) with the aim to better understand decision-making between people with PD (PwP) and their physicians.
METHODS: A scoping literature review was conducted searching Medline and Embase to identify quantitative preference studies assessing PD treatments and surveying PwP, caregivers or physicians. Data was collected on publication year, country, participants, preference elicitation method, attributes, levels, primary and subgroup analysis.
RESULTS: The search identified 915 studies, with 11 (published between 2000 and 2024) meeting the inclusion criteria. Studies employed discrete-choice experiments (n=8), best-worst-scaling (n=3), and a threshold technique (n=1). Participants include PwP (n=10) and neurologists (n=1) based in US (n=7), Spain (n=2), Netherlands (n=2), Sweden (n=1), and Japan (n=1). The number of attributes ranged from 4 to 7 (mean=5). Most commonly explored attributes were “ON time”, reflecting efficacy on symptoms, and “route of administration” (ROA). “ON time” was frequently defined as “ON time without [troublesome] dyskinesia,” and measured in terms of onset of treatment action, additional daily hours, or total duration per day. “ROA” included oral tablets, sublingual films, inhalation, injections, implanted device, portable pump, deep brain stimulation, and intraduodenal continuous infusion. Other common attributes included “medication regimen”, “device maintenance”, safety events (e.g., risk of depression, bleeding, death), and efficacy outcomes (symptom control of tremors, bradykinesia, dyskinesia, speech impairment). Studies consistently identified “ON time” and “ROA” as important attributes of PD treatments, with negative preferences for surgical requirements (brain or gastric) and frequent oral medication intake. Seven studies examined the impact of PwP characteristics on preferences through subgroup analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: Trends in preferences for PD treatments were consistent across studies, with “ON time” and “ROA” frequently identified as key aspects. Current research primarily addresses established therapies, neglecting emerging options such as subcutaneous infusions. Caregiver perspectives are also underrepresented. Future research should address these gaps.