Patient preferences versus physicians' judgement: does it make a difference in healthcare decision making?

Paramedic Practitioners within ambulance services: views of Australian policymakers, health professionals, and consumers

BACKGROUND

Globally, ambulance services face overwhelming primary and urgent care presentations that they are not structurally or culturally designed to manage efficiently or effectively. One mechanism to meet this consumer demand is the implementation of Paramedic Practitioner models with postgraduate qualifications in primary and urgent care. This study explores interest-holder views on reactive Paramedic Practitioner models within Australian ambulance services.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team representing ambulance services was formed, including paramedicine, nursing, and medicine. A realist lens was adopted, and a qualitative research design using inductive thematic analysis employed. Semi-structured focus groups or interviews were conducted to obtain data from 56 participants. Interest-holders represented included consumers (n = 16), members of parliament (n = 3), government executives (n = 8), industry executives representing emergency medicine, general practice, nursing, and paramedicine (n = 6), ambulance service executives and medical directors (n = 7), researchers (n = 8), and practicing clinicians from paramedicine, nursing, and medicine (n = 8).

RESULTS

Consumers described calling ambulance services for non-emergency complaints as they didn't know if their concern was an emergency or not, not wanting to go to hospital, and wanting someone to listen to them, reassure them, and then quickly solve their problem on the spot: they saw Paramedic Practitioners as aptly meeting this need. Among the healthcare professions, opinions were divided. Most participants were largely unfamiliar with Paramedic Practitioners or the evidence base supporting this model of practice, the concept received widespread support at the clinician level, and a small but avidly dissenting contingent of national policymakers opposed the models. Paramedic Practitioner models were considered to require broad support across the healthcare system to be effective. Policymakers were unsure which outcomes they wanted measured to evaluate models.

CONCLUSION

This study reports a wide range of interest-holder perspectives on the use of reactive Paramedic Practitioners within Australian ambulance services. Enablers (n = 10) and barriers (n = 10) to efficient and effective Paramedic Practitioner models were identified. Key outcomes of interest (n = 6) were identified, and these may be operationalised in future evaluations of reactive Paramedic Practitioner programs.

Patient Experience Regarding Medication-Related Information Received in a Rural Private Polyclinic Setting in Vietnam

Inadequate provision of medication-related information can lead to nonadherence to treatment. This study aims to investigate patient satisfaction regarding medication-related information provided by healthcare professionals and to identify factors associated with patient experience regarding information. A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted in October 2023 among 400 patients at a rural private polyclinic in Ben Tre, Vietnam by using a self-administered questionnaire. The key findings of this study showed that over half of the participants expressed overall satisfaction with the information provided (52%), with 57.5% satisfaction on the action and use subscale, and 56.8% satisfaction on the potential problems subscale. Patients aged 41 to 60 (P = .018), those older than 60 (P = .001), those with more than 2 dependents (P = .038), and those receiving information only from nurses (P = .009) were more likely to be satisfied with the information they received. Patient satisfaction with medication-related information received was low. Healthcare professionals should ensure timely and comprehensive communication about medications, particularly regarding potential side effects. While this study primarily focused on satisfaction, the closely related concept of patient experience warrants further exploration in future studies with a more deliberate focus.

Health Professionals' Preferences for Next-Generation Sequencing in the Diagnosis of Suspected Genetic Disorders in the Paediatric Population

Background/Objectives: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) can explain how genetics influence morbidity and mortality in children. However, it is unclear whether health providers will perceive and use such treatments. We conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to understand Italian health professionals' preferences for NGS to improve the diagnosis of paediatric genetic diseases. Methods: The DCE was administered online to 125 health professionals in Italy. We documented attributes influencing professionals' decisions of NGS, including higher diagnostic yield, shorter counselling periods, cost, turnaround time, and the identification of fewer variants of unknown significance. Results: Results show that factors such as higher diagnostic yield, shorter counselling periods, lower costs, and faster turnaround times positively influenced the adoption of NGS tests. Willingness to pay (WTP) estimates varied from EUR 387 (95% CI, 271.8-502.9) for 7% increase in the diagnostic yield to EUR 469 (95% CI, 287.2-744.9) for a decrease of one week in the turnaround time. Responders would reduce diagnostic yield by 7% to decrease the turnaround time by one week in both the preference and the willingness to trade (WTT) spaces. Respondents prioritised diagnostic yield (RI = 50.36%; 95% CI 40.2-67.2%) compared to other attributes. Conclusions: therefore, health professionals value NGS for allowing earlier, more accurate genetic diagnoses.

A deep-learning system for diagnosing ectopic eruption

OBJECTIVES

To construct a diagnostic model for mixed dentition using a multistage deep-learning network to predict potential ectopic eruption in permanent teeth by integrating dentition segmentation into the process of automatic classification of dental development stages.

METHODS

A database was established by reviewing 1576 anonymous panoramic radiographs of children aged 6-12 years, collected at the Stomatology Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine. These radiographs were categorised as normal or ectopic eruption, with expert diagnoses serving as a benchmark for training and evaluating artificial intelligence (AI) models. Furthermore, tooth boundaries and dental development stages were manually annotated by three pediatric dentistry experts. The dataset was split into training, validation, and test sets at an 8:1:1 ratio.

RESULTS

The diagnostic performance of the deep-learning model was rigorously evaluated. The model demonstrated accuracy in tooth segmentation, with Intersection over Union, precision, sensitivity, and F1 scores of 0.959, 0.993, 0.966, and 0.979, respectively. Furthermore, its ability to identify tooth ectopic eruptions on panoramic radiographs, when compared to evaluations by three dentists. Based on McNemar's test, the model's specificity and accuracy in identifying ectopic tooth eruptions on the test dataset surpassed that of Dentist 1 (P < 0.05), while no significant difference was observed compared to the other two dentists. Besides, the deep learning model also showed its potential in classifying dental development stages, as tested against three different standards.

CONCLUSIONS

The adaptability of the AI-enabled model in this study was demonstrated across multiple scenarios, with clinical validation highlighting its efficacy in diagnosing ectopic eruptions using a multistage deep-learning approach.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Our findings provide new insights and technical support for the prevention and treatment of abnormal tooth eruption, laying the groundwork for predictive models for other prevalent pediatric dentistry conditions.

Patient preferences on pen injectors for assisted reproductive technology: a discrete choice experiment in France

BACKGROUND

The preference of patients in the choice of pen injectors for Assisted Reproduction Technology (ART) is an important issue for treatment adherence. This study, based on discrete choice experiment (DCE), aimed to elicit patients' preferences of the characteristics of all pen injectors available in France.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A DCE with 12 choice sets was developed to measure the preferences of 6 attributes: pre-injection steps, injection device, dose release, post-injection display, dose reduction method, and dose counter. A mixed logistic model was used to determine the preference ranks and calculate utility score.

RESULTS

The study involved 155 women who had previous experience with the use of injector pens with an average age of 34.1 years. Statistically significant results showed that the most essential characteristics were dose confirmation (p < 0.0001), dose counter with digits (p < 0.0001), multi-use pen (p < 0.0001) and ready-to-use pens (p < 0.0001). Estimation of the utilities showed statistically significant difference in favor of Gonal-f®/Pergoveris® (reference modalities) versus other pens, and the largest difference was with Rekovelle® [95% CI:-1,37;-0.85], and Bemfola® [95% CI:-2.25;-1,52].

CONCLUSIONS

This study show that respondent preferred pen that are ready to use, can be used multiple times, have dose injection confirmation, and display the dose with digits.

Client preferences for the design and delivery of injectable opioid agonist treatment services: Results from a best-worst scaling task

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Clinical trials support injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) for individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) for whom other pharmacological management approaches are not well-suited. However, despite substantial research indicating that person-centered care improves engagement, retention and health outcomes for individuals with OUD, structural requirements (e.g. drug policies) often dictate how iOAT must be delivered, regardless of client preferences. This study aimed to quantify clients' iOAT delivery preferences to improve client engagement and retention.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional preference elicitation survey.

SETTING

Metro Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

124 current and former iOAT clients.

MEASUREMENTS

Participants completed a demographic questionnaire package and an interviewer-led preference elicitation survey (case 2 best-worst scaling task). Latent class analysis was used to identify distinct preference groups and explore demographic differences between preference groups.

FINDINGS

Most participants (n = 100; 81%) were current iOAT clients. Latent class analysis identified two distinct groups of client preferences: (1) autonomous decision-makers (n = 73; 59%) and (2) shared decision-makers (n = 51; 41%). These groups had different preferences for how medication type and dosage were selected. Both groups prioritized access to take-home medication (i.e. carries), the ability to set their own schedule, receiving iOAT in a space they like and having other services available at iOAT clinics. Compared with shared decision-makers, fewer autonomous decision-makers identified as a cis-male/man and reported flexible preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) clients surveyed in Vancouver, Canada, appear to prefer greater autonomy than they currently have in choosing OAT medication type, dosage and treatment schedule.

"How can we help you?": results of a scoping review on the perceived needs of people living with chronic pain regarding physiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Physiotherapy is effective to reduce pain and improve the quality of life of people living with chronic pain. To offer high-quality physiotherapy services, these services must be patient-centred and respond to patients' needs. However, few studies seem to target patients' perceived needs, whereas more studies tend to focus on needs assessed by healthcare experts, which are not always in line with patients' perceived needs. In addition, people living with chronic pain are often faced with several health inequities and may have varied perceived needs depending on their personal conditions. To offer services that truly meet patients' needs, it is therefore crucial to understand these needs. This scoping review aims to identify and map the perceived needs of people living with chronic pain towards physiotherapy services.

METHODS

To conduct this review, we followed the six stages framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley. We searched four databases (Medline, Embase, CINHAL and APA PsycINFO) as well as the grey literature. We included all studies describing the needs, demands, preferences or expectations of adults living with chronic pain towards physiotherapy. We then performed an inductive thematic analysis of the results and discussion sections of these studies to identify the perceived needs. Once those needs were identified, we mapped them into the seven dimensions of the patient-centred healthcare delivery framework.

RESULTS

Our review included 96 studies. Various perceived needs were identified through the thematic analysis, such as the needs for an empathetic relationship; for a clear, adapted and supervised exercise program; and for personalized treatment. Our mapping into the patient-centred healthcare delivery framework showed that most studies reported needs associated with the dimensions of interpersonal care, individualized healthcare and professional care. Needs associated with the other dimensions of the framework (access; coordination and continuity; services and facilities; data and information) were less frequently mentioned.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review have enabled us to identify and better understand multiple needs perceived by people living with chronic pain regarding physiotherapy services. The perceived needs identified through this scoping review were mapped within the seven dimensions of the Patient-centred healthcare delivery framework.

Preferences of patients and physicians in the United States for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma treatments

BACKGROUND

Patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) often relapse or become refractory to treatment (R/R). While the R/R FL treatment landscape evolves, little is known about the priorities of patients and physicians. This discrete-choice experiment (DCE) study assessed patients' and physicians' treatment preferences, and the trade-offs they would be willing to make between efficacy, tolerability, and administration.

METHODS

An online survey was conducted in US-based patients (≥18 years) with R/R FL and FL-treating physicians. The DCE was informed by a targeted literature review, clinical data, expert oncologist input, and pilot interviews. Participants completed eight experimental choice tasks where they chose between two hypothetical treatment profiles defined by six attributes: progression-free survival (PFS), administration/monitoring, risks of laboratory abnormalities requiring intervention, severe infections, diarrhea, and cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Relative attribute importance (RAI) and willingness to trade-off between PFS and other attributes were estimated.

RESULTS

Two-hundred patients (mean age 63.5 years; median three prior lines of therapy) and 151 FL-treating physicians participated. Increasing PFS was most important for both groups, although it was relatively less important to patients than physicians (RAI 35.2% vs. 45.7%). Administration/monitoring was three times more important to patients than physicians (RAI 28.8% vs. 9.5%); patients preferred oral treatment and would be willing to tolerate a significant reduction in PFS for oral administration over weekly intravenous infusions. Avoiding CRS was less important to patients than to physicians (RAI 7.7% vs. 15.8%). Both groups would accept shorter PFS for reduced risks of side effects (especially of laboratory abnormalities for patients and of CRS for physicians).

CONCLUSION

Although PFS was the most important attribute to patients and physicians, both would tolerate lower PFS for reduced side effects. Patients would also accept a substantial reduction in PFS for oral administration. Differences between the preferences/priorities of patients and physicians highlight the importance of shared decision-making.

Physician and Patient Preferences for Treatment of Anemia Associated with Chronic Kidney Disease in Japan: A Survey Including Best-Worst Scaling

Background

Several treatment options are available for anemia associated with chronic kidney disease (CKD); however, there remains a lack of awareness of physician and patient preferences regarding these treatments. We aimed to explore physicians' and patients' perceptions and preferences regarding the management of anemia of CKD in Japan.

Methods

A web-based survey, including best-worst scaling (BWS), was conducted with physicians who had treated ≥1 patient with anemia of CKD in the preceding year, and with patients with CKD who self-reported a clinical diagnosis of anemia of CKD or low hemoglobin levels. A three-step approach was used comprising cognitive interviews, a pilot survey, and a main survey. The BWS survey results were analyzed using multinomial logit and hierarchical Bayesian models.

Results

The survey was completed by 906 participants: 103 patients (average age 60.6 years; 77.7% male) and 803 physicians (166 nephrologists, 214 cardiologists, 137 diabetologists, and 286 general internists). Almost all (96.0%) physicians surveyed considered anemia of CKD to be an important condition to treat. Hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase (HIF-PH) inhibitors had the highest treatment satisfaction among physicians, whereas patients had the highest satisfaction with both erythropoietin-stimulating agent therapy and HIF-PH inhibitors. Approximately one-third (35.9%) of patients surveyed indicated that they were receiving treatment. When comparing the relative importance of attributes and levels, physicians favored efficacy (particularly improvement in hemoglobin levels), whereas patients favored safety (particularly a lower rate of severe adverse events).

Conclusion

Although a majority of physicians consider treatment of CKD-related anemia important, differences in the perceptions and usage of medications exist between medical specialties. Preferences for the management of anemia of CKD vary between physicians and patients; therefore, patient involvement in treatment decisions may help optimize outcomes.

Meeting the Needs of Patient Preferences in Imaging

Healthcare continues to transition toward a patient-centered paradigm, where patients are active in medical decisions. Fully embracing this new paradigm means updating how clinical guidelines are formulated, accounting for patient preferences for medical care. Recently, several societies have incorporated patient preference evidence in their updated clinical practice guidelines, and patients in their expert panels. To fully transition to a patient-centered-paradigm, imaging organizations should rethink the formulation of clinical guidelines, accounting for patient preference evidence.

Factors influencing U.S. women's interest and preferences for breast cancer risk communication: a cross-sectional study from a large tertiary care breast imaging center

BACKGROUND

Breast imaging clinics in the United States (U.S.) are increasingly implementing breast cancer risk assessment (BCRA) to align with evolving guideline recommendations but with limited uptake of risk-reduction care. Effectively communicating risk information to women is central to implementation efforts, but remains understudied in the U.S. This study aims to characterize, and identify factors associated with women's interest in and preferences for breast cancer risk communication.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional survey study of U.S. women presenting for a mammogram between January and March of 2021 at a large, tertiary breast imaging clinic. Survey items assessed women's interest in knowing their risk and preferences for risk communication if considered to be at high risk in hypothetical situations. Multivariable logistic regression modeling assessed factors associated with women's interest in knowing their personal risk and preferences for details around exact risk estimates.

RESULTS

Among 1119 women, 72.7% were interested in knowing their breast cancer risk. If at high risk, 77% preferred to receive their exact risk estimate and preferred verbal (52.9% phone/47% in-person) vs. written (26.5% online/19.5% letter) communications. Adjusted regression analyses found that those with a primary family history of breast cancer were significantly more interested in knowing their risk (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.0, 2.1, p = 0.04), while those categorized as "more than one race or other" were significantly less interested in knowing their risk (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2, 0.9, p = 0.02). Women 60 + years of age were significantly less likely to prefer exact estimates of their risk (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.5, 0.98, p < 0.01), while women with greater than a high school education were significantly more likely to prefer exact risk estimates (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.5, 4.2, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

U.S. women in this study expressed strong interest in knowing their risk and preferred to receive exact risk estimates verbally if found to be at high risk. Sociodemographic and family history influenced women's interest and preferences for risk communication. Breast imaging centers implementing risk assessment should consider strategies tailored to women's preferences to increase interest in risk estimates and improve risk communication.

Clinical Patient-Relevant Outcome Domains for Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome-A Scoping Review and Expert Panels

Large variation exists in the monitoring of clinical outcome domains in patients with persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS). Furthermore, it is unclear which outcome domains are important from the PSPS patient's perspective. The study objectives were to identify patient-relevant outcome domains for PSPS and to establish a PSPS outcomes framework. PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, and EMBASE were searched to identify studies reporting views or preferences of PSPS patients on outcome domains. The Arksey and O'Malley framework was followed to identify outcome domains. An expert panel rated the domains based on the importance for PSPS patients they have treated. A framework of relevant outcome domains was established using the selected outcome domains by the expert panel. No studies were found for PSPS type 1. Five studies with 77 PSPS type 2 patients were included for further analysis. Fourteen outcome domains were identified. An expert panel, including 27 clinical experts, reached consensus on the domains pain, daily activities, perspective of life, social participation, mobility, mood, self-reliance, and sleep. Eleven domains were included in the PSPS type 2 outcomes framework. This framework is illustrative of a more holistic perspective and should be used to improve the evaluation of care for PSPS type 2 patients. Further research is needed on the prioritization of relevant outcome domains.

Preferences of Patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis for Intrathecal Drug Delivery: Choosing between an Implanted Drug-Delivery Device and Therapeutic Lumbar Puncture

BACKGROUND

Novel intrathecal treatments for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) may require delivery using lumbar puncture (LP). Implanted drug-delivery devices (IDDDs) could be an alternative but little is known about patients' preferences for intrathecal drug-delivery methods.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to elicit preferences of patients with ALS for routine LP and IDDD use.

METHODS

A discrete choice experiment (DCE) and a threshold technique (TT) exercise were conducted online among patients with ALS in the US and Europe. In the DCE, patients made trade-offs between administration attributes. Attributes were identified from qualitative interviews. The TT elicited maximum acceptable risks (MARs) of complications from device implantation surgery. DCE data were analyzed using mixed logit to quantify relative attribute importance (RAI) as the maximum contribution of each attribute to a preference, and to estimate MARs of device failure. TT data were analyzed using interval regression. Four scenarios of LP and IDDD were compared.

RESULTS

Participants (N = 295) had a mean age of 57.7 years; most (74.2%) were diagnosed < 3 years ago. Preferences were affected by device failure risk (RAI 28.6%), administration frequency (26.4%), administration risk (19.7%), overall duration (17.8%), and appointment location (7.5%). Patients accepted a 5.6% device failure risk to reduce overall duration from 2 h to 30 min and a 3.6% risk for administration in a local clinic instead of a hospital. The average MAR of complications from implantation surgery was 29%. Patients preferred IDDD over LP in three of four scenarios.

CONCLUSION

Patients considered an IDDD as a valuable alternative to LP in multiple clinical settings.

You may delay, but time will not. Beta cells lost are never found again: a case for timely initiation of basal insulin in type 2 diabetes

Since its first use just over a century ago, insulin treatment has evolved dramatically, such that the molecules are physiologic in nature, and treatment can now closely resemble the natural hormone response over 24 hours. Newer, longer-acting basal insulin analogs have provided insulin therapies with improved characteristics and, therefore, ease of use, and can readily be incorporated as part of routine treatment for type 2 diabetes (T2D), but evidence suggests that insulin remains underused in people with T2D. We review the barriers to initiation of basal insulin and the education needed to address these barriers, and we provide practical pointers, supported by evidence, for primary care physicians and advanced practice providers to facilitate timely initiation of basal insulin in the people with T2D who will benefit from such treatment.

How to Present a Decision Object in Health Preference Research: Attributes and Levels, the Decision Model, and the Descriptive Framework

In health preference research (HPR) studies, data are generated by participants'/subjects' decisions. When developing an HPR study, it is therefore important to have a clear understanding of the components of a decision and how those components stimulate participant behavior. To obtain valid and reliable results, study designers must sufficiently describe the decision model and its components. HPR studies require a detailed examination of the decision criteria, detailed documentation of the descriptive framework, and specification of hypotheses. The objects that stimulate subjects' decisions in HPR studies are defined by attributes and attribute levels. Any limitations in the identification and presentation of attributes and levels can negatively affect preference elicitation, the quality of the HPR data, and study results. This practical guide shows how to link the HPR question to an underlying decision model. It covers how to (1) construct a descriptive framework that presents relevant characteristics of a decision object and (2) specify the research hypotheses. The paper outlines steps and available methods to achieve all this, including the methods' advantages and limitations.

Presence of the partner in the operating room during a category 1 cesarean section: a prospective explorative study

BACKGROUND

Little information exists regarding attitudes related to the presence of the partner in the operation room (OR) during category 1 emergency cesarean section (cat. 1 CS). We investigated how cat. 1 CS under general anesthesia is experienced, both by partners present in the OR and those not.

METHODS

An explorative prospective cohort trial, with qualitative elements, involving all cat. 1 CS in 2022 in two hospitals. At site 1 the partner was present in the OR during cat. 1 CS, whereas at site 2 the partner was not. Parents and staff answered questionnaires following each cat. 1 CS and semi-structured interviews with partners were held three months after surgery. Qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis. The primary outcome was the partner's answer to the question: "Would you have preferred not being present/being present in the OR?" respectively.

RESULTS

Seventeen and eight cat. 1 CS occurred at each site respectively. All parents agreed to participate. No partners in site 1 would have preferred to wait outside, and all evaluated the experience very positively. Partners at site 2 also evaluated not being present positively. Overarching themes from the qualitative analysis were "Being the family witness" and "Experience of being the partner". Mothers and staff from site 1 were very positive about their partners' presence.

CONCLUSION

Partners present in the OR during cat. 1 CS under general anesthesia evaluated this very positively. Most partners, who had not been present in the OR, also evaluated this positively. No partners had post-traumatic stress.

Outcomes and Attributes Patients Value When Choosing Glucose-Lowering Medications: A Mixed-Methods Study

This mixed-methods study sought to identify pharmacotherapy preferences among 40 noninsulin-treated adults with type 2 diabetes receiving care at two U.S. health care systems. Participants ranked by relative importance various health outcomes and medication attributes and then contextualized their rankings. Most participants ranked blindness (63%), death (60%), heart attack (48%), and heart failure (48%) as the most important health outcomes and glucose-lowering efficacy (68%) as the most important medication attribute, followed by oral administration (45%) and lack of gastrointestinal side effects (38%).

Exploring the valued outcomes of school-based speech-language therapy services: a sequential iterative design

Background

Achieving outcomes that community members value is essential to high-quality, family-centred care. These valued outcomes should inform the production and interpretation of research evidence. To date, outcomes included in studies of service delivery models for speech-language services in schools have been narrowly defined, and do not match the outcomes suggested as important by families, teachers, and children. The most important outcomes of school-based, speech-languages services have not been directly and systematically investigated. We aimed to address this gap by asking school community members what outcomes were most relevant to evaluating and improving the delivery of speech-language services in schools.

Methods

A sequential, iterative mixed-method study was conducted using interviews with 14 family members, educators, and speech-language therapists that asked what outcomes or impacts of school-based services they considered most important or valuable. Summative content analysis was used to analyse the data. Structural topic modelling between rounds of qualitative analysis was used to describe both the quality and the quantity of the interview content. School community members' perspectives were compared through estimation of topic proportions within interviews from each member group and through qualitative comparison.

Results

Structural topic modelling diagnostics and qualitative interpretation of topic output suggested a six-topic solution. This solution was estimated successfully and yielded the following topics: (1) meeting all needs appropriately, (2) teamwork and collaboration, (3) building capacities, (4) supporting individual student needs in context, (5) coordinating care, and finally (6) supporting core educational goals. Families focused on school-based services meeting all needs appropriately and coordinating care, while educators highlighted supporting individual student needs in context. By contrast, speech-language therapists emphasized building capacities and supporting core educational goals. All school community members agreed that current assessment tools and outcome measures were inadequate to capture the most important impacts of school-based services.

Conclusions

Outcomes identified by school community members as important or valuable were broad, and included individual student outcomes, interpersonal outcomes, and systems-level outcomes. Although these outcomes were discussed by all member groups, each group focused on different outcomes in the interviews, suggesting differences in the prioritization of outcomes. We recommend building consensus regarding the most important outcomes for school-based speech-language services, as well as the prioritization of outcomes for measure development.

How do hospital providers perceive and experience the information-delivery process? A qualitative exploratory study

Objective

To explore how professionals deal with informing their patients and how they experience the process per se, in order to deepen understanding of the issues involved and to identify areas of focus for improvement.

Methods

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 13 hospital professionals at Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland.

Results

Information includes feedback, practical information, patient condition, treatment/process of care, and educational material. Information-delivery is a process that involves informing the patient then checking patient reception of the information. The main expected outcome is patient action. Providers can feel trapped, guilty, inadequate, powerless, disenchanted when the process fails to achieve its expected purpose.

Conclusions

Informing and checking strategies are not implemented optimally, and providers could benefit from guidance in order to decrease discomfort and become more proficient at delivering information.

Innovation

Addressing the information-delivery process per se provides us with a novel insight into the complexity of the process and contributes to identifying essential ingredients of future innovative training programs for providers at large.

Which body functions and activities matter for stroke patients? Study protocol for best-Worst scalings to value core elements of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health

BACKGROUND

Stroke is a common, serious, and disabling healthcare problem with increasing incidence and prevalence. Following a stroke, identifying the factors associated with decisions about rehabilitation interventions is important to assess rehabilitation after stroke. The aim is to guide clinical staff to make patient-centered decisions. Fundamentally, decision makers cannot draw on evidence to consider the relevance of distinct functions and activities from the patient's perspective. Until now, outcomes of rehabilitation are generally categorized using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). This can be seen as a conceptual basis for the assessment of health and disability. Since the ICF does not distinguish importance between these aspects there is a need to value the most important clinical factors as well as related activities from a patients and public perspective to help guide therapists in effectively designing post-acute rehabilitation care for individuals following stroke. The research question is which ICF body functions and activities are of value to stroke patients? Which trade-offs are patients willing to make within the core elements? Health preference research (HPR) answers the need to develop additional preference weights for certain ICF dimensions. Patient preference information (PPI) values health conditions based on the ICF from a patient perspective.

METHODS

In this study we conduct three best-worst scaling (BWS) experiments to value body function and activities from patients' and public perspective. Out of all ICF dimensions this research covers health conditions relevant to stroke patients in terms of body function, perception, and activities of daily living. Stroke patients as well as members of the general population will be recruited to participate in the online BWS surveys. Fractional, efficient designs are applied regarding the survey design. Conditional and multinominal logit analyses will be used as the main analysis method, with the best-worst count analysis as a secondary analysis. The survey is being piloted prior to commencing the process of data collection. Results are expected by the autumn of 2023.

DISCUSSION

The research will add to the current literature on clinical decision-making in stroke rehabilitation and the value of certain body functions as well as related activities in neurorehabilitation. Moreover, the study will show whether body functions and activities that are currently equally weighted in international guidelines are also equally important from the point of view of those affected, or whether there are disconcordances in terms of differences between public judgements and patients' preferences.

Differences between physician and patient preferences for cancer treatments: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is useful to facilitate cancer treatment decisions. However, it is difficult to make treatment decisions when physician and patient preferences are different. This review aimed to summarize and compare the preferences for cancer treatments between physicians and patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Scopus. Studies elicited and compared preferences for cancer treatments between physicians and patients were included. Information about the study design and preference measuring attributes or questions were extracted. The available relative rank of every attribute in discrete choice experiment (DCE) studies and answers to preference measuring questions in non-DCE studies were summarized followed by a narrative synthesis to reflect the preference differences.

RESULTS

Of 12,959 studies identified, 8290 were included in the title and abstract screening and 48 were included in the full text screening. Included 37 studies measured the preferences from six treatment-related aspects: health benefit, adverse effects, treatment process, cost, impact on quality of life, and provider qualification. The trade-off between health benefit and adverse effects was the main focus of the included studies. DCE studies showed patients gave a higher rank on health benefit and treatment process, while physicians gave a higher rank on adverse effects. Non-DCE studies suggested that patients were willing to take a higher risk of adverse effects or lower health benefit than physicians when accepting a treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians and patients had important preference differences for cancer treatment. More sufficient communication is needed in cancer treatment decision-making.

The Personalized Acne Treatment Tool - Recommendations to facilitate a patient-centered approach to acne management from the Personalizing Acne: Consensus of Experts

Background

Acne, a commonly treated skin disease, requires patient-centered management due to its varying presentations, chronicity, and impact on health-related quality of life. Despite this, evidence-based clinical guidelines focus primarily on clinical severity of facial acne, omitting important patient- and disease-related factors, including ongoing management.

Objectives

To generate recommendations to support patient-centered acne management, which incorporate priority and prognostic factors beyond conventional clinical severity, traditionally defined by grading the appearance and extent of visible lesions.

Methods

The Personalizing Acne: Consensus of Experts consisted of 17 dermatologists who used a modified Delphi approach to reach consensus on statements regarding patient- and treatment-related factors pertaining to patient-centered acne management. Consensus was defined as ≥75% voting "agree" or "strongly agree."

Results

Recommendations based on factors such as acne sequelae, location of acne, high burden of disease, and individual patient features were generated and incorporated into the Personalized Acne Treatment Tool.

Limitations

Recommendations are based on expert opinion, which may differ from patients' perspectives. Regional variations in healthcare systems may not be represented.

Conclusions

The Personalizing Acne: Consensus of Experts panel provided practical recommendations to facilitate individualized management of acne, based on patient features, which can be implemented to improve treatment outcomes, adherence, and patient satisfaction.

Getting specific: participation preference in urooncological decision-making

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is the gold standard for good clinical practice, and thus, psychometric instruments have been established to assess patients' generic preference for participation (e.g., the Autonomy Preference Index, API). However, patients' preferences may vary depending on the specific disease and with respect to the specific decision context. With a modified preference index (API-Uro), we assessed patients' specific participation preference in preference-sensitive decisions pertaining to urological cancer treatments and compared this with their generic participation preference.

METHODS

In Study 1, we recruited (N = 469) urological outpatients (43.1% urooncological) at a large university hospital. Participation preference was assessed with generic measures (API and API case vignettes) and with the disease-specific API-Uro (urooncological case vignettes describing medical decisions of variable difficulty). A polychoric exploratory factor analysis was used to establish factorial validity and reduce items. In Study 2, we collected data from N = 204 bladder cancer patients in a multicenter study to validate the factorial structure with confirmatory factor analysis. Differences between the participation preference for different decision contexts were analyzed.

RESULTS

Study 1: Scores on the specific urooncological case vignettes (API-Uro) correlated with the generic measure (r = .44) but also provided incremental information. Among the disease-specific vignettes of the API-Uro, there were two factors with good internal consistency (α ≥ .8): treatment versus diagnostic decisions. Patients desired more participation for treatment decisions (77.8%) than for diagnostic decisions (22%), χ²(1) = 245.1, p ≤ .001. Study 2: Replicated the correlation of the API-Uro with the API (r = .39) and its factorial structure (SRMR = .08; CFI = .974). Bladder cancer patients also desired more participation for treatment decisions (57.4%) than for diagnostic decisions (13.3%), χ²(1) =84, p ≤ .001.

CONCLUSIONS

The desire to participate varies between treatment versus diagnostic decisions among urological patients. This underscores the importance of assessing participation preference for specific contexts. Overall, the new API-Uro has good psychometric properties and is well suited to assess patients' preferences. In routine care, measures of participation preference for specific decision contexts may provide incremental, allowing clinicians to better address their patients' individual needs.

The systematic and participatory development of a patient decision aid about terminal devices for people with upper limb absence: The PDA-TULA

Selecting an upper limb prosthesis seems to be a challenge considering the high rejection rates. A patient decision aid (PDA) could support the decision-making process by providing information about available options and clarifying the patients' values related to those options. This study aims to describe the developmental process of a PDA about terminal devices (TDs) for people with upper limb absence: PDA-TULA. The developmental process was based on The International Patient Decision Aid Standards. We aimed at adults with major unilateral upper limb absence. A steering group including patients, clinicians, researchers, software and implementation experts was composed. The content and design of the PDA were based on a qualitative literature meta-synthesis, focus groups with patients and clinicians, surveys among patients and prosthetists, a nationwide digital meeting with clinicians and prosthetists, and information from manufacturers. Information on features of TDs was systematically collected, ordered, and refined. Subsequently, drafts of the PDA-TULA were made, improved, integrated into the software, and alpha tested. The digital PDA-TULA consists of three parts: (1) information about TDs; (2) consideration of personal values regarding the TDs; (3) comparison of TD profiles with a personal profile based on indicated preferences. A summarizing overview is offered to patients and clinicians. To conclude, a digital PDA, which was integrated into the national working process of clinicians, was developed in a systematic co-creation process. The PDA enables patients and their significant others to consider and formulate their preferences about TDs during the prosthesis selection process.

Comparative analysis of systemic oncological treatments and best supportive care for advanced gastresophageal cancer: A comprehensive scoping review and evidence map

OBJECTIVE

To identify, describe, and organize the available evidence regarding systemic oncological treatments compared to best supportive care (BSC) for advanced gastresophageal cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a thorough search across MEDLINE (PubMed), EMbase (Ovid), The Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, PROSPERO, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Our inclusion criteria encompassed systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental and observational studies involving patients with advanced esophageal or gastric cancer receiving chemotherapy, immunotherapy or biological/targeted therapy compared to BSC. The outcomes included survival, quality of life, functional status, toxicity, and quality of end-of-life care.

RESULTS

We included and mapped 72 studies, comprising SRs, experimental and observational designs, 12 on esophageal cancer, 51 on gastric cancer, and 10 both locations. Most compared schemes including chemotherapy (47 studies), but did not report therapeutic lines. Moreover, BSC as a control arm was poorly defined, including integral support and placebo. Data favor the use of systemic oncological treatments in survival outcomes and BSC in toxicity. Data for outcomes including quality of life, functional status, and quality of end-of-life care were limited. We found sundry evidence gaps specifically in assessing new treatments such as immunotherapy and important outcomes such as functional status, symptoms control, hospital admissions, and the quality of end-life care for all the treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

There are important evidence gaps regarding new for patients with advanced gastresophageal cancer and the effect of systemic oncological treatments on important patient-centered outcomes beyond survival. Future research should clearly describe the population included, specifying previous treatments and considering therapeutic, and consider all patient-centered outcomes. Otherwise, it will be complex to apply research results into practice.

Preferences of Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease for Invasive Versus Conservative Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Background Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) can experience acute coronary syndromes (ACS) with high morbidity and mortality. Early invasive management of ACS is recommended for most high-risk patients; however, choosing between an early invasive versus conservative management approach may be influenced by the unique risk of kidney failure for patients with CKD. Methods and Results This discrete choice experiment measured the preferences of patients with CKD for future cardiovascular events versus acute kidney injury and kidney failure following invasive heart procedures for ACS. The discrete choice experiment, consisting of 8 choice tasks, was administered to adult patients attending 2 CKD clinics in Calgary, Alberta. The part-worth utilities of each attribute were determined using multinomial logit models, and preference heterogeneity was explored using latent class analysis. A total of 140 patients completed the discrete choice experiment. The mean age of patients was 64 years, 52% were male, and mean estimated glomerular filtration rate was 37 mL/min per 1.73 m². Across the range of levels, risk of mortality was the most important attribute, followed by risk of end-stage kidney disease and risk of recurrent myocardial infarction. Latent class analysis identified 2 distinct preference groups. The largest group included 115 (83%) patients, who placed the greatest value on treatment benefits and expressed the strongest preference for reducing mortality. A second group of 25 (17%) patients was identified who were procedure averse and had a strong preference toward conservative management of ACS and avoiding acute kidney injury requiring dialysis. Conclusions The preferences of most patients with CKD for management of ACS were most influenced by lowering mortality. However, a distinct subgroup of patients was strongly averse to invasive management. This highlights the importance of clarifying patient preferences to ensure treatment decisions are aligned with patient values.

Patient preferences for epilepsy treatment: a systematic review of discrete choice experimental studies

BACKGROUND

This review aimed to 1) identify and assess the quality of discrete choice experiments (DCEs) examining preferences related to epilepsy treatment; 2) summarize the attributes and attribute levels measured in these studies; 3) identify how researchers selected and developed these attributes; and 4) identify which attributes are most important for epilepsy patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature review using PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases from database inception to February or April 2022. We included primary discrete-choice experiments eliciting preferences for various attributes of pharmacological and surgical interventions in patients diagnosed with epilepsy or the parents/carers of children with epilepsy. We excluded non- primary studies, studies assessing preferences for nonpharmacological treatment and studies that elicit preferences using methods other than discrete choice experiments. Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of studies. The quality of the included studies was assessed using two validated checklists. Study characteristics and findings were summarized descriptively.

RESULTS

A total of seven studies were included in the review. The majority of studies explored patients' preferences, and two compared the preferences of patients with physicians. The majority (n = 6) compared two medications, and one compared two surgical options to continuing medication options. The studies examined 44 attributes in total, including side effects (n = 26), efficacy expressed as being seizure free or have fewer seizures (n = 8), costs (n = 3), dosing frequency (n = 3), duration of side effects (n = 2), mortality (n = 1), long-term problems after surgery (n = 1) and surgical options (n = 1). The findings indicate that people with epilepsy have strong preferences for improving seizure control, which was ranked as the top priority in all studies. Patients also have a strong preference for the reduction of adverse effects and may be willing to make trade-offs between improved seizure control and reduction of long-term side effects that may impact their quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of DCEs in measuring patients' preference for epilepsy treatment is accumulating. However, inadequate reporting of methodological details may reduce decision-makers' confidence in the findings. Suggestions for future research are provided.

Discrete Choice Experiment to Understand Japanese Patients' and Physicians' Preferences for Preventive Treatments for Migraine

INTRODUCTION

Self-injectable calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody (mAb) auto-injectors and non-CGRP oral medications are currently available for migraine prevention in Japan. This study elicited the preferences for self-injectable CGRP mAbs and non-CGRP oral medications and determined differences in the relative importance of auto-injector attributes for patients and physicians in Japan.

METHODS

Japanese adults with episodic (EM) or chronic (CM) migraine and physicians who treat migraine completed an online discrete choice experiment (DCE), asking participants to choose a hypothetical treatment they preferred between two self-injectable CGRP mAb auto-injectors and a non-CGRP oral medication. The treatments were described by seven treatment attributes, with attribute levels varying between questions. DCE data were analyzed using a random-constant logit model to estimate relative attribution importance (RAI) scores and predicted choice probabilities (PCP) of CGRP mAb profiles.

RESULTS

A total of 601 patients (79.2% with EM, 60.1% female, mean age: 40.3 years) and 219 physicians (mean length of practice: 18.3 years) completed the DCE. About half (50.5%) of patients favored CGRP mAb auto-injectors, while others were skeptical of (20.2%) or averse (29.3%) to them. Patients most valued needle removal (RAI = 33.8%), shorter injection duration (RAI = 32.1%), and auto-injector base shape and need for skin pinching (RAI = 23.2%). Most physicians (87.8%) favored auto-injectors over non-CGRP oral medications. Physicians most valued less-frequent dosing RAI = 32.7%), shorter injection duration (30.4%), and longer storage outside the fridge (RAI = 20.3%). A profile comparable to galcanezumab showed a higher likelihood of being chosen by patients (PCP = 42.8%) than profiles comparable to erenumab (PCP = 28.4%) and fremanezumab (PCP = 28.8%). The PCPs of the three profiles were similar among physicians.

CONCLUSION

Many patients and physicians preferred CGRP mAb auto-injectors over non-CGRP oral medications and preferred a treatment profile similar to galcanezumab. Our results may encourage physicians in Japan to consider patient preferences when recommending migraine preventive treatments.

Measuring the preferences of injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) clients: Development of a person-centered scale (best-worst scaling)

BACKGROUND

Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) is effective for opioid use disorder (OUD), yet little is known about client preferences for accessing iOAT (e.g., with diacetylmorphine, hydromorphone, buprenorphine, fentanyl, etc.). Best-worst scaling (BWS) is a preference elicitation method from health economics that has never been applied to addiction care broadly, or iOAT specifically. We describe the stages of developing a BWS scale that assesses iOAT clients' treatment delivery preferences to inform program planning and maximize healthcare efficiency.

METHODS

We underwent several steps to reveal the relevant attributes/levels and design the scale structure. An initial list of potential attributes and levels was established from a literature review and prior qualitative data. Then, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with clients (n=21) on their iOAT preferences to confirm the attributes and prioritize/include new ones. Next, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with iOAT experts and stakeholders to receive their input on the draft list of attributes and levels. A BWS profile case design was piloted with iOAT clients (n=18) from different sites during a think aloud interview. After several rounds of revisions, the final version was tested by iOAT clients (n=2) before the scale was launched.

RESULTS

We developed a person-centered scale that assesses current and former iOAT clients' most and least wanted aspects of iOAT delivery. The final version yielded 7 unique attributes: choice of medication, choice of dose, convenience, location & space, scheduling & routines, staff & training, and types of services offered.

CONCLUSION

This scale can help expand iOAT programs in a way that is person-centered, rapid, and affordable. The methodology is a guide for other regions with similar populations who aim to develop strong quantitative methodologies that prioritize client collaboration.

Decisional Needs and Patient Treatment Preferences for Heart Failure Medications: A Scoping Review

Background

Pharmacologic management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) involves several medications. Decision aids informed by patient decisional needs and treatment preferences could assist in making HFrEF medication choices; however, these are largely unknown.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), without language restriction, for qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-method studies that included patients with HFrEF or clinicians providing HFrEF care, and reported data on decisional needs or treatment preferences applicable to HFrEF medications. We classified decisional needs using a modified version of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF).

Results

From 3996 records, we included 16 reports describing 13 studies (n = 854). No study explicitly assessed ODSF decisional needs; however, 11 studies reported ODSF-classifiable data. Patients commonly reported having inadequate knowledge or information, and difficult decisional roles. No study systematically assessed treatment preferences, but 6 studies reported on attribute preferences. Reducing mortality and improving symptoms frequently were ranked as being important, whereas cost importance rankings varied, and adverse events generally were ranked as being less important.

Conclusion

This scoping review identified key decisional needs regarding HFrEF medications, notably inadequate knowledge or information, and difficult decisional roles, which can readily be addressed by decision aids. Future studies should systematically explore the full scope of ODSF-based decisional needs in patients with HFrEF, along with relative preferences among treatment attributes to further inform development of individualized decision aids.

Do They Align? Congruence Between Patient Preferences of People Living with Cognitive Impairments and Physicians' Judgements for Person-Centered Care: An Analytic Hierarchy Process Study

BACKGROUND

Person-centered care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. Among people living with cognitive impairments (PlwCI), evidence on quantitative, choice-based preferences, which allow to quantify, weigh, and rank care elements, is limited. Furthermore, data on the congruence of patient preferences with physicians' judgements for PCC are missing. Such information is expected to support the implementation of PCC; state-of-the-art medical care aligned with patients' preferences.

OBJECTIVE

To elicit patient preferences and physicians' judgements for PCC and their congruence.

METHODS

Data from the mixed-methods PreDemCare study, including a cross-sectional, paper-and-pencil, interviewer-assisted analytic hierarchy process (AHP) survey conducted with n = 50 community-dwelling PlwCI and n = 25 physicians. Individual AHP weights (preferences/judgements) were calculated with the principal eigenvector method and aggregated per group by aggregation of individual priorities mode. Individual consistency ratios (CRs) were calculated and aggregated per group. Group differences in preferences/judgements were investigated descriptively by means and standard deviations (SDs) of AHP weights, resulting ranks, and boxplots. Additionally, differences between groups were investigated with independent paired t-test/Mann Whitney U-test. Sensitivity of AHP results was tested by inclusion/exclusion of inconsistent respondents, with an accepted threshold at CR≤0.3 for patients, and CR≤0.2 for physicians, due to better cognitive fitness of the latter group.

RESULTS

Patient preferences and physicians' judgements did not differ significantly, except for the criterion Memory Exercises (AHP weights (mean (SD)): 0.135 (0.066) versus 0.099 (0.068), p = 0.01). We did not see rank-reversals of criteria after exclusion of inconsistent participants. Mean CR for patients at the criteria level was 0.261, and 0.181 for physicians.

CONCLUSION

Physicians' judgements in our setting aligned well with patients' preferences. Our findings may be used to guide the implementation of preference-based PCC.

Feasibility of Testing Client Preferences for Accessing Injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment (iOAT): A Pilot Study

Purpose

Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) is an effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). To our knowledge, no research has systematically studied client preferences for accessing iOAT. Incorporating preferences could help meet the heterogenous needs of clients and make addiction care more person-centred. This paper presents a pilot study of a best-worst scaling (BWS) preference elicitation survey that aimed to assess if the survey was feasible and accessible for our population and to test that the survey could gather sound data that would suit our planned analyses.

Patients and Methods

Current and former iOAT clients (n = 18) completed a BWS survey supported by an interviewer using a think-aloud approach. The survey was administered on PowerPoint, and responses and contextual field notes were recorded manually. Think-aloud audio was recorded on Audacity.

Results

Clients' feedback fell into five categories: framing of the task, accessibility, conceptualization of attributes and levels, formatting, and behaviour predicting questions. Survey repetitiveness was the most consistent feedback. The data simulation showed that 100 responses should provide an adequate sample size.

Conclusion

This pilot demonstrates the type of analysis that can be done with BWS in our population, suggests that such analysis is feasible, and highlights the importance of the interviewer and participant working side-by-side throughout the task.

Ethical issues with geographical variations in the provision of health care services

Geographical variations are documented for a wide range of health care services. As many such variations cannot be explained by demographical or epidemiological differences, they are problematic with respect to distributive justice, quality of care, and health policy. Despite much attention, geographical variations prevail. One reason for this can be that the ethical issues of geographical variations are rarely addressed explicitly. Accordingly, the objective of this article is to analyse the ethical aspects of geographical variations in the provision of health services. Applying a principlist approach the article identifies and addresses four specific ethical issues: injustice, harm, lack of beneficence, and paternalism. Then it investigates the normative leap from the description of geographical variations to the prescription of right care. Lastly, the article argues that professional approaches such as developing guidelines, checklists, appropriateness criteria, and standards of care are important measures when addressing geographical variations, but that such efforts should be accompanied and supported by ethical analysis. Hence, geographical variations are not only a healthcare provision, management, or a policy making problem, but an ethical one. Addressing the ethical issues with geographical variations is key for handling this crucial problem in the provision of health services.

Analyzing Factors Influencing Patient Selection of a Surgeon for Elective Surgery in Saudi Arabia: A Questionnaire-Based Survey

BACKGROUND

Nowadays patients are encouraged to partake in healthcare decision making and patient preferences are given increasing weight. Patient's choice is important to reduce waiting time and to encourage competition between providers, as most patients look for high-quality care while minimizing costs, according to different studies this may not be as simple as the attributes and factors that patients value when selecting a hospital or surgeon. Overall, Saudi Arabia has minimal research on how patients select surgeons or surgical facilities. Therefore, the goal of the current study was to evaluate the criteria Saudi population patients used to select their surgeons.

OBJECTIVE

The objective is to determine the relative importance of the following aspects that patients may consider when selecting a surgeon: (a) physician-related considerations; (b) elements relating to healthcare service and access; (c) the perspectives of patients on various factors.

METHODS

This observational cross-sectional study attempts to investigate the criteria that people in Saudi Arabia considered most important while selecting their surgeons. This study was conducted between August and November 2022. The questionnaire is also given in English along with Arabic.

RESULTS

Six hundred nine completed the survey with a response rate of 91.6%. Concerning physician-related factors considered when choosing a surgeon attitudes of the physician were the factor most significantly contributed to physician selection rather than reputation or professional experience and physician social media: (84.7%) mentioned that paying attention to patient's needs and opinions is important; sparing enough time for patients is important as reported by 83.9% of the participants; Personal care and hygiene is important for 83.4% of the participants; Communication skills were considered to be important as stated by 82.6% of the participants. Regarding healthcare services/access-related factors considered by patients in physician selection; it was found that patients considered hospital hygiene-cleanliness (91.3 %) as the most significant healthcare service/access-related factor in physician selection and then it comes Ease of obtaining an appointment (89.7%), reasonable scheduling and wait for time (87.7%) and cost of surgery (82.1%). Physician selection was deemed crucial to the success of the therapy by 87.7% of patients, while 88.3% of patients thought it was crucial to research the doctor before contacting her or him for the current admission.

CONCLUSION

Patients consider a wide range of variables when selecting their surgeons and the location of their procedure. Depending on sociodemographic, cultural, and other aspects, the conditions surrounding patients' decisions may vary. Overall, the selection of a surgeon by surgery patients appears to be more influenced by the doctor's attitudes than by his or her reputation, professional experience, or social media presence. In order to elicit preferences across a wider range of surgical subspecialties and patient demographics, more study is necessary.

Healthcare preferences of the general Chinese population in the hierarchical medical system: A discrete choice experiment

Background

Chinese health insurance system faces resource distribution challenges. A patient-centric approach allows decision-makers to be keenly aware of optimized medical resource allocation.

Objective

This study aims to use the discrete choice model to determine the main factors affecting the healthcare preferences of the general Chinese population and their weights in the three scenarios (chronic non-communicable diseases, acute infectious diseases, and major diseases).

Methods

This study firstly identified the key factors affecting people's healthcare preferences through literature review and qualitative interviews, and then designed the DCE questionnaire. An online questionnaire produced by Lighthouse Studio (version 9.9.1) software was distributed to voluntary respondents recruited from mainland China's entire population from January 2021 to June 2021. Participants were required to answer a total of 21 questions of three scenarios in the questionnaire. The multinomial logit model and latent class model were used to analyze the collected data.

Results

A total of 4,156 participants from mainland China were included in this study. The multinomial logit and latent class model analyses showed that medical insurance reimbursement is the most important attribute in all three disease scenarios. In the scenario of "non-communicable diseases," the attributes that participants valued were, from the most to the least, medical insurance reimbursement (45.0%), hospital-level (21.6%), distance (14.4%), cost (9.7%), waiting time (8.3%), and care provider (1.0%). As for willingness to pay (WTP), participants were willing to pay 204.5 yuan, or 1,743.8 yuan, to change from private hospitals or community hospitals to tertiary hospitals, respectively.

Conclusions

This study explores the healthcare preferences of Chinese residents from a new perspective, which can provide theoretical reference for the refinement of many disease medical reimbursement policies, such as developing different reimbursement ratios for various common diseases and realizing rational configuration of medical resources.

Information needs, expectations, and treatment preference of patients considering spinal surgery: A case-control survey

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control survey.

OBJECTIVES

To explore intrapersonal factors associated with decision of patients with degenerative back pain for surgery.

METHODS

From September 2018 to May 2019 patients were invited to complete a questionnaire. Patients who decided on (case) and declined surgery (control) were later confirmed from medical records.

RESULTS

Seventy-five patients were recruited. Male patients (75.0%, p = 0.019), those who were married (78.7%, p = 0.0045), and had spousal care-givers (89.2%, p < 0.0001) were more likely to decide for surgery. All patients who decided on surgery expressed need for information on "the severity of their spine conditions" (p = 0.039). Those who decided on surgery did not have as the high expectation on "to sleep more comfortably" as those who declined (4.71 vs. 4.91, p = 0.022). The predictive factors for surgery decision by logistic regression analysis were: male gender (OR = 3.23, 95% CI: 1.19-8.77, p = 0.021); married (OR = 5.231, 95% CI: 1.87-14.61, p = 0.002); with available spousal care-giver (OR = 1.85, 95% CI: 0.198-3.89, p = 0.031); and those who preferred to treat/cure the spine disorder by pharmacological treatment (OR = 2.77, 95% CI: 1.02-7.50, p = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

Patients who decided on surgery were likely to indicate need of medical information related to their condition. Patients were in hope of better relief of physical symptoms, especially related to sleep comfort. Patients would escalate their treatment from conservative to surgery when conservative treatments were no longer effective.

Using Intervention Mapping to Develop a Novel Pain Self-Management Intervention for People with Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is common among patients with cirrhosis and is challenging to treat. While promising, pain self-management (PSM) interventions have not been tailored to this population's needs.

AIMS

To design a PSM intervention for patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with 17 patients with cirrhosis, 12 hepatologists, and 6 administrators from two medical centers were conducted to inform a rigorous, structured intervention mapping (IM) process. Qualitative content analysis was guided by social cognitive theory (SCT) and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and incorporated into intervention development. A planning group met regularly throughout the intervention, to reach consensus about how to use data and theory to develop the intervention through IM.

RESULTS

Participants described barriers to PSM behaviors, including the absence of simple, evidence-based interventions for pain for patients with cirrhosis, inadequate provider knowledge, time, and training, and lack of champions, funding, and communication. Patients described high motivation to treat pain using behavioral methods including meditation, prayer, and exercise. The intervention was designed to address barriers to PSM behaviors for patients with cirrhosis, using behavior change methods that address knowledge, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations. The LEAP (Liver Education About Pain) intervention is a 12-week, modular intervention delivered by phone via individual and group sessions with a health coach.

CONCLUSIONS

People with cirrhosis, hepatologists, and administrators informed this theory-driven, tailored PSM intervention, which was designed to be implementable in the real world.

Nurses' sources of information to inform clinical practice: An integrative review to guide evidence-based practice

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based practice in nursing is challenging and relies on the sources of information used by nurses to inform clinical practice. An integrative review from 2008 revealed that nurses more frequently relied on information from colleagues than information from high-level sources such as systematic reviews and evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.

AIMS

To describe the information sources used by registered nurses to inform their clinical practice.

METHODS

An integrative review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines, based on empirical research studies published from January 2007 until June 2021. The included studies were appraised, following which the identified sources of information from quantitative studies were compiled and ranked. Finally, the qualitative text data were summarized into categories.

RESULTS

Fifty-two studies from various countries were included. The majority of studies employed a quantitative design and used original instruments. Peers were ranked as the number one source of information to inform nurses' clinical practice. However, computers and reference materials are now ranked among the top four most used information sources.

LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION

Improvement in computer and information searching skills, as well as the availability of computerized decision support tools, may contribute to nurses' frequent use of digital sources and reference material to inform clinical practice. This review shows that nurses' most frequently reported peer nurses as their source of information in clinical practice. Information sources such as computers and reference materials were ranked higher, and information from patients was ranked lower than in the 2008 review. Developing and standardizing instruments and ensuring high-quality study design is critical for further research on nurses' sources of information for clinical practice.

Elicitation of quantitative, choice-based preferences for Person-Centered Care among People living with Dementia in comparison to physicians' judgements in Germany: study protocol for the mixed-methods PreDemCare-study

BACKGROUND

Person-Centered-Care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. Among People-living-with-Dementia (PlwD) data on quantitative, choice-based preferences, which would allow to quantify, weigh and rank patient-relevant elements of dementia-care, and identify most/least preferred choices, are limited. The Analytic-Hierarchy-Process (AHP) may be one approach to elicit quantitative, choice-based preferences with PlwD, due to simple pairwise comparisons of individual criteria from a complex decision-problem, e.g. health care decisions. Furthermore, data on congruence of patient preferences with physicians' judgements for PCC are missing. If patient preferences and physicians' judgements differ, provision of PCC becomes unlikely. An understanding of patient preferences compared to physician's judgements will support the implementation of truly PCC, i.e. state of the art dementia-care aligned with patient preferences.

METHODS

This mixed-methods-study will be based on the results from a previous systematic review and conducted in three phases: (I) literature-based key intervention-categories of PCC will be investigated during qualitative interviews with Dementia-Care-Managers (DCMs) and PlwD to identify actually patient-relevant (sub) criteria of PCC; (II) based on findings from phase I, an AHP-survey will be designed and pre-tested for face- and content-validity, and consistency during face-to-face "thinking-aloud"-interviews with PlwD and two expert panels (DCMs and physicians); (III) the developed survey will elicit patient preferences and physicians' judgements for PCC. To assess individual importance weights for (sub) criteria in both groups, the Principal-Eigenvector-Method will be applied. Weights will be aggregated per group by Aggregation-of-Individual-Priorities-mode. Descriptive and interferential statistical analyses will be conducted to assess congruence of importance-weights between groups. Subgroup-analyses shall investigate participant-heterogeneities, sensitivity of AHP-results shall be tested by inclusion/exclusion of inconsistent respondents.

DISCUSSION

Little research is published on quantitative, choice-based preferences in dementia care. We expect that (1) PlwD have preferences and can express these, (2) that the AHP is a suitable technique to elicit quantitative, choice-based preferences among PlwD, and (3) to identify a divergence between patient preferences and physicians' judgements for PCC. With the help of the AHP-technique, which supports systematic decision-making including multiple criteria, it may be possible to involve PlwD in future care decisions (patient participation) and ensure implementation of truly Person-Centered-Dementia-Care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Approval of the study was granted by the Ethics Committee at the University Medicine Greifswald the 09Apr2021 (Reg.-Nr.: BB 018-21, BB 018-21a, BB 018-21b).

Supporting rehabilitation stakeholders in making service delivery decisions: a rapid review of multi-criteria decision analysis methods

PURPOSE

This review aimed to synthesize knowledge about multi-criteria decision analysis methods for supporting rehabilitation service design and delivery decisions, including: (1) describing the use of these methods within rehabilitation, (2) identifying decision types that can be supported by these methods, (3) describing client and family involvement, and (4) identifying implementation considerations.

METHODS

We conducted a rapid review in collaboration with a knowledge partner, searching four databases for peer-reviewed articles reporting primary research. We extracted relevant data from included studies and synthesized it descriptively and with conventional content analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 717 records, of which 54 met inclusion criteria. Multi-criteria decision analysis methods were primarily used to understand the strength of clients' and clinicians' preferences (n = 44), and five focused on supporting decision making. Shared decision making with stakeholders was evident in only two studies. Clients and families were mostly engaged in data collection and sometimes in selecting the relevant criteria. Good practices for supporting external validity were inconsistently reported. Implementation considerations included managing cognitive complexity and offering authentic choices.

CONCLUSIONS

Multi-criteria decision analysis methods are promising for better understanding client and family preferences and priorities across rehabilitation professions, contexts, and caseloads. Further work is required to use these methods in shared decision making, for which increased use of qualitative methods and stakeholder engagement is recommended. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONMulti-criteria decision analysis methods are promising for evidence-based, shared decision making for rehabilitation.However, most studies to date have focused on estimating stakeholder preferences, not supporting shared decision making.Cognitive complexity and modelling authentic and realistic decision choices are major barriers to implementation.Stakeholder-engagement and qualitative methods are recommended to address these barriers.

Benefit-risk assessment and reporting in clinical trials of chronic pain treatments: IMMPACT recommendations

ABSTRACT

Chronic pain clinical trials have historically assessed benefit and risk outcomes separately. However, a growing body of research suggests that a composite metric that accounts for benefit and risk in relation to each other can provide valuable insights into the effects of different treatments. Researchers and regulators have developed a variety of benefit-risk composite metrics, although the extent to which these methods apply to randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of chronic pain has not been evaluated in the published literature. This article was motivated by an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials consensus meeting and is based on the expert opinion of those who attended. In addition, a review of the benefit-risk assessment tools used in published chronic pain RCTs or highlighted by key professional organizations (ie, Cochrane, European Medicines Agency, Outcome Measures in Rheumatology, and U.S. Food and Drug Administration) was completed. Overall, the review found that benefit-risk metrics are not commonly used in RCTs of chronic pain despite the availability of published methods. A primary recommendation is that composite metrics of benefit-risk should be combined at the level of the individual patient, when possible, in addition to the benefit-risk assessment at the treatment group level. Both levels of analysis (individual and group) can provide valuable insights into the relationship between benefits and risks associated with specific treatments across different patient subpopulations. The systematic assessment of benefit-risk in clinical trials has the potential to enhance the clinical meaningfulness of RCT results.

Patient-based benefit-risk assessment of medicines: development, refinement, and validation of a content search strategy to retrieve relevant studies

Introduction:

Poor indexing and inconsistent use of terms and keywords may prevent efficient retrieval of studies on the patient-based benefit-risk assessment (BRA) of medicines. We aimed to develop and validate an objectively derived content search strategy containing generic search terms that can be adapted for any search for evidence on patient-based BRA of medicines for any therapeutic area.

Methods:

We used a robust multistep process to develop and validate the content search strategy: (1) we developed a bank of search terms derived from screening studies on patient-based BRA of medicines in various therapeutic areas, (2) we refined the proposed content search strategy through an iterative process of testing sensitivity and precision of search terms, and (3) we validated the final search strategy in PubMed by firstly using multiple sclerosis as a case condition and secondly computing its relative performance versus a published systematic review on patient-based BRA of medicines in rheumatoid arthritis.

Results:

We conceptualized a final search strategy to retrieve studies on patient-based BRA containing generic search terms grouped into two domains, namely the patient and the BRA of medicines (sensitivity 84%, specificity 99.4%, precision 20.7%). The relative performance of the content search strategy was 85.7% compared with a search from a published systematic review of patient preferences in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. We also developed a more extended filter, with a relative performance of 93.3% when compared with a search from a published systematic review of patient preferences in lung cancer.

Patient and physician preferences for non-invasive diagnostic cardiovascular imaging technologies: a discrete choice experiment

Purpose

Diagnostic imaging techniques have to be selected for their accuracy, efficiency, cost-efficiency, and impact on outcome. But beyond that, the choice of non-invasive cardiovascular imaging tests for diagnosing coronary artery disease also has to respect patient safety and comfort. In this study, we investigated patient and physician preference in relation to the choice of cardiovascular imaging tests.

Results

A total of 211 subjects (148 cardiac patients and 63 physicians) were enrolled and completed a discrete choice experiment. Tests and modalities were deconstructed into 6 attributes (risks and side effects, diagnostic accuracy, patient out-of-pocket cost, type of procedure, type of scanner and test duration). A Sawtooth software choice-based conjoint analysis with hierarchical Bayes estimation was performed and showed the risks and side effects attribute was assigned the most relative importance (30%) when considering patients’ preference. Patients gave notably high value to tests with milder side effects, while preferring to avoid exposure to ionizing radiation and risks associated the use of pharmacological agents inducing direct coronary arteriolar vasodilation. Physicians allocated more importance to the patient out-of-pocket cost attribute (29%). Both patients and physicians valued tests’ risks and side effects, diagnostic accuracy, patient out-of-pocket cost as the three most important attributes, but in diverging order. A market simulation comparing current cardiovascular imaging tests revealed breathing maneuver-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance had the highest shares of preference in both patients (59.6%) and physicians (32.7%).

Conclusion

A patients’ preference for a particular cardiovascular imaging test was most determined by the risks and side effects, while physicians prioritized less costly tests for their patients. In shared decision-making with patients, physicians should therefore focus on a balanced discussion of risks and side effects associated with cardiovascular imaging tests. Both, patients and physicians would prefer a cardiovascular MR imaging test using a vasoactive breathing maneuver instead of currently used alternatives that require intravenous contrast agents, pharmacological stress, or radiation.

More work needed on decision analysis for shared decision-making: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To explore and characterize published evidence on the ways decision analysis has been used to inform shared decision-making.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

For this scoping review, we searched five bibliographic databases (from inception until February 2021), reference lists of included studies, trial registries, a thesis database and websites of relevant interest groups. Studies were eligible if they evaluated the application of decision analysis in a shared decision-making encounter. Pairs of reviewers independently screened and selected studies for inclusion, extracted study information using a data extraction form developed by the research team and assessed risk of bias for all studies with an experimental or quasi-experimental design. Data were narratively synthesized.

RESULTS

We identified 27 studies that varied greatly with regard to their patient population, design, content and delivery. A range of outcomes were evaluated to explore the effectiveness and acceptability of decision analytic interventions, with little information about the implementation process. Most studies found that decision analysis was broadly beneficial.

CONCLUSION

Despite the compelling rationale on the potential for decision analysis to support shared decision-making, rigorous randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these interventions' effectiveness, while qualitative studies should seek to understand their potential implementation.

Dynamics of Patient-Based Benefit-Risk Assessment of Medicines in Chronic Diseases: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

A critical gap exits in understanding the dynamics of patient-based benefit-risk assessment (BRA) of medicines in chronic diseases during the disease journey.

PURPOSE

To systematically review and synthesize current evidence on the changes of patients' preferences about the benefits and risks of medicines during their disease journey including the influence of disease duration and severity, and previous treatment experience.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies identified in PubMed and Embase, from inception to November 2020, was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. Articles were eligible if they analyzed adult patient-based BRA of medicines with a chronic disease, based on at least one of the pre-specified dimensions: disease severity, disease duration, or previous treatment experience.

RESULTS

A total of 26,228 articles were identified and 105 were eligible for inclusion. Of these, 85 detected a variation in patient-based BRA of medicines with at least one of the pre-specified criteria. Patients with higher disease severity and more treatment experience have increased risk tolerance. It remains inconclusive whether disease duration directly affects the relative importance of a patient's preference.

CONCLUSION

Factors important for patients' BRA of their medicines during a chronic disease journey vary more with their clinical situation and previous treatment experience than with time since diagnosis. Due to the importance of these factors on patients' perspectives and potential impact on their decision-making and eventually their clinical outcomes, there is a need for more studies to assess the dynamics of patients' BRA in every disease.

Improving personalized treatment decision-making for older adults with cancer: The necessity of eliciting patient preferences

We have a fundamental responsibility as oncologists to deliver personalized care tailored to each individual. In addition to an unprecedented expansion of treatment options for patients, recent advances in molecular profiling and functional assessments have greatly improved our ability to predict risks, benefits, and outcomes for older patients with cancer.^1,2 Molecular profiling identifies genomic abnormalities and allows oncologists to predict response to cancer therapy. Functional assessment such as a geriatric assessment allows oncologists to predict risks of treatment-related morbidity and mortality. Ongoing efforts aim to further refine our ability to predict outcomes for individuals by identifying relevant clinically meaningful thresholds (e.g., cut-off values for variant allele frequency, fitness criteria for a specific disease). Complex risk prediction models are now routinely used to integrate these data and produce personalized estimates of survival and response to cancer therapies, helping oncologists to provide personalized, high-quality care. Assessments of the disease and function of the patient, however, are insufficient to guide personalized treatment recommendations—we must understand patient preferences for treatment outcomes in order to tailor treatment.

Towards Effective Patient Simulators

In this paper we give an overview of the field of patient simulators and provide qualitative and quantitative comparison of different modeling and simulation approaches. Simulators can be used to train human caregivers but also to develop and optimize algorithms for clinical decision support applications and test and validate interventions. In this paper we introduce three novel patient simulators with different levels of representational accuracy: HeartPole, a simplistic transparent rule-based system, GraphSim, a graph-based model trained on intensive care data, and Auto-ALS—an adjusted version of an educational software package used for training junior healthcare professionals. We provide a qualitative and quantitative comparison of the previously existing as well as proposed simulators.

The Personalised Acne Care Pathway-Recommendations to guide longitudinal management from the Personalising Acne: Consensus of Experts

BACKGROUND

Acne is a chronic disease with a varying presentation that requires long-term management. Despite this, the clinical guidelines for acne offer limited guidance to facilitate personalized or longitudinal management of patients.

OBJECTIVES

To generate recommendations to support comprehensive, personalized, long-term patient management that address all presentations of acne and its current and potential future burden.

METHODS

The Personalising Acne: Consensus of Experts panel consisted of 13 dermatologists who used a modified Delphi approach to reach consensus on statements related to longitudinal acne management. The consensus was defined as ≥75% voting "agree" or "strongly agree." All voting was electronic and blinded.

RESULTS

Key management domains, consisting of distinct considerations, points to discuss with patients, and "pivot points" were identified and incorporated into the Personalised Acne Care Pathway. Long-term treatment goals and expectations and risk of (or fears about) sequelae are highlighted as particularly important to discuss frequently with patients.

LIMITATIONS

Recommendations are based on expert opinion, which could potentially differ from patients' perspectives. Regional variations in health care systems may not have been captured.

CONCLUSIONS

The Personalised Acne Care Pathway provides practical recommendations to facilitate the longitudinal management of acne, which can be used by health care professionals to optimize and personalize care throughout the patient journey.

Patient Preferences for Outcomes Following DCIS Management Strategies: A Discrete Choice Experiment

PURPOSE

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), a nonobligate precursor of breast cancer, is often aggressively managed with multimodal therapy. However, there is limited research on patients' preferences for trade-offs among treatment-related outcomes such as breast appearance, side effects, and future cancer risk. We sought to investigate whether women consider treatment features aside from cancer risk when making treatment choices for ductal carcinoma in situ and if so, to what degree other features influence these decisions.

METHODS

A discrete choice experiment was administered to participants in a comprehensive cancer screening mammography clinic. The experimental design was used to generate constructed health profiles resulting from different management strategies. Health profiles were defined by breast appearance, severity of infection within the first year, chronic pain, hot flashes, and risk of developing or dying from breast cancer within 10 years.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-four women without a personal history of breast cancer completed the choice task. Across 10 choice questions, 29% always selected the health profile with a lower risk of invasive breast cancer (ie, dominated on cancer risk), regardless of the effects of treatment. For nonrisk dominators, breast cancer risk remained the most important factor but was closely followed by chronic pain (24% [95% CI, 20 to 28]) and infection (22% [95% CI, 18 to 25]). Depending on treatment outcomes, the tolerable increase in breast cancer risk was as high as 3.4%.

CONCLUSION

Most women were willing to make some trade-offs between invasive cancer risk and treatment-related outcomes. Our findings highlight the importance of shared decision-making weighing risks and benefits between patient and provider management of low-risk disease.