Abstract
Oclacitinib is an oral therapy indicated for pruritus associated with allergic or atopic dermatitis in dogs. This study sought to assess pet owners' perceptions of the relative convenience and value of the conventional film-coated formulation and the chewable formulation. A quantitative discrete-choice experimental methodology was applied, comparing (conventional, film-coated) oclacitinib versus chewable oclacitinib using unbranded treatment profiles. Initially, a qualitative interview phase with pet owners and veterinarians was conducted to develop detailed treatment profiles. Subsequently, pet owners participated in a quantitative survey. Overall, 1590 pet owners provided survey responses. Most respondents (62%) reported having experienced challenges administering tablet-based therapies to their dog(s). Half of all respondents (52%) had experience administering flavoured or chewable tablets to their dog. Comparing oclacitinib and chewable oclacitinib (with or without associated costs), the majority of the respondents preferred the chewable formulation in all regions across short-term and long-term scenarios (≥58%; all p < 0.05). The current research is one of few survey-driven studies for treatment preferences in companion animal medicine. Veterinarians may offer chewable or palatable treatment options where available, with potential positive impacts on convenience, compliance, outcomes, quality of life, and the human-animal bond.