Patient Perspectives and Experiences of Preventive Treatments and Self-Injectable Devices for Migraine: A Focus Group Study

• Published in: The patient : patient-centered outcomes research 2022-01, Vol.15 (1), p.93-108
• Main Authors: Seo, Jaein, Smith, Charlie A., Thomas, Caitlin, Tervonen, Tommi, Hareendran, Asha, Ford, Janet H., Stauffer, Virginia L., Nicholson, Robert A., Duffy, Kevin Harrison, Tockhorn-Heidenreich, Antje
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Clinical trials; Focus Groups; Germany; Headaches; Health Administration; Health Economics; Humans; Internet resources; Literature reviews; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Migraine; Migraine Disorders - drug therapy; Migraine Disorders - prevention & control; Original; Original Research Article; Pharmacoeconomics and Health Outcomes; Preferences; Public Health; Qualitative Research; Quality of Life Research; Questionnaires; Self Care; United States
• ISSN: 1178-1653; 1178-1661
• DOI: 10.1007/s40271-021-00525-z

Background Although several self-injectable preventive treatments for migraine have become available, they are not yet widely used. Thus, understanding patients’ perceptions towards them is limited. Objective This study aimed to inform the design of a preference-elicitation instrument, which is being developed to quantify preventive treatment preferences of people with migraine. Methods We conducted a qualitative study involving nine in-person focus groups (three per country) in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany. Participants were adults ( n = 47) with episodic or chronic migraine who were currently using or had used a prescription preventive treatment for migraine within the previous 5 years. During the focus groups, participants described their experiences of migraine and preventive treatments; handled and simulated self-injection using five different unbranded, fired demonstration auto-injectors and prefilled syringes; and ranked different aspects of preventive treatments by importance. Focus groups were analyzed with a focus on themes that would be feasible or meaningful to include in a subsequent preference-elicitation instrument. Results Reducing the frequency and severity of migraine attacks was consistently ranked as the most important aspect of preventive treatment. Participants expressed dissatisfaction with available daily oral preventive treatments for migraine they had previously used because they were ineffective or caused intolerable adverse events. Many participants were willing to self-inject a treatment that was effective and tolerable. When presented with devices for self-injecting a preventive treatment for migraine, participants generally preferred autoinjectors over prefilled syringes. Participants especially valued safety features such as the unlocking step and automated needle insertion, and audible and visual dose confirmation increased confidence in autoinjector use. Autoinjector needle protection mechanisms were also appreciated, especially by participants averse to needles, as the needles are not visible. Conclusions This study highlights the fact that many people with migraine still lack access to a preventive treatment that is effective and tolerable. In addition to efficacy and safety considerations, treatment decisions may be guided by the mode of administration. In the case of self-injectable preventive treatments, key device characteristics affecting these decisions may be ease of use, comfort, and confide