Do patients and health care providers have discordant preferences about which aspects of treatments matter most? Evidence from a systematic review of discrete choice experiments

Measuring Patient Preferences to Inform Clinical Trial Design: An Example in Rheumatoid Arthritis

BACKGROUND

Allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT) may be a curative treatment for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but it has serious risks, including death. It is uncertain whether patients would accept the risks and benefits of BMT and participate in clinical trials. We conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to quantify risk tolerance and benefit-risk trade-offs to inform the design of a clinical trial for BMT.

METHODS

We conducted a DCE with three attributes (three levels each): chance of stopping disease progression (50-90%), increased chance of death in year after transplant (3-15%), and chance of chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) (3-15%). An orthogonal main effects design of nine binary choice tasks were presented for two scenarios: one considering their current situation and a second scenario where the patient has failed seven anti-rheumatic drugs. Participants were recruited from the Rheum4U inflammatory arthritis registry. Choice data were analyzed using a logit model accounting for multiple responses per participant.

RESULTS

Sixty patients participated. Most (82%) had severe disease, and the median number of anti-rheumatic drugs previously taken was 6 (range 0-18). As expected, an increased chance of stopping disease progression increases the probability of choosing BMT, while increased chance of both risks decreases the probability. Patients were willing to accept a 3% increase in risk of death or 6% increase in chance of chronic GVHD for a 10% increase in the chance of stopping disease progression. For the most clinically likely BMT risk-benefit profiles, and the likely initial target population of patients who have failed multiple biologics, between 72% and 91% of patients would choose BMT.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with RA are willing to accept substantial risks for a chance to stop disease progression with BMT, suggesting that a pilot trial of BMT for RA could successfully recruit patients. Preference studies have an important role in informing patient-centered clinical trial planning and design.

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.

Effects of Virtual Care on Patient and Provider Experience of the Clinical Encounter: Qualitative Hermeneutic Study

BACKGROUND

Virtual health care has transformed health care delivery, with its use dramatically increasing since the COVID-19 pandemic. While it has been quickly adopted for its convenience and efficiency, there has been a relative lack of in-depth exploration of its human impact, specifically how both patients and providers experience clinical encounters.

OBJECTIVE

This analysis aims to identify and explore themes of change in how patients and providers in a geographically dispersed renal service described their experiences with virtual care, including those changes that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Hermeneutics is an interpretive research methodology that treats human experience as inherently interpretive, generating meaning through interactions with others in specific, historically conditioned, social contexts. A total of 17 patients and 10 providers from various disciplines were interviewed by phone as part of a study on health care implementation in the context of a kidney care service in northern British Columbia, Canada. The interview data were analyzed using a hermeneutic approach, which emphasizes careful attention to reported experiences in relation to the relationships and contexts of care.

RESULTS

During analysis, the interdisciplinary team identified themes related to changes in the clinical encounter and how virtual care influenced perceptions of care among both providers and patients. We organized these themes into 2 categories: the structure and content of the encounter. The structure category included the convenience for patients, who no longer had to travel long distances for appointments, as well as changes in care networks. For example, communication between specialist services and local primary care providers became more crucial for ensuring continuity of care. The content category included issues related to trust-building and assessment. Providers expressed concerns about the difficulty in assessing and understanding their patients' physical and social well-being beyond laboratory results.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in the study appreciated the convenience of not needing to travel for appointments, while still having the option for in-person contact with local providers or specialists if their condition changed. Providers were more concerned about the loss of visual cues and sensory data for assessments, as well as the reduced opportunity to build relationships through conversation with patients. Providers also described changes in the locus of control and boundaries, as patients could join phone encounters from anywhere, bypassing traditional privacy and confidentiality boundaries. The study offers a nuanced view of the effects of virtual care on clinical encounters in one setting, seen through the experiences of both patients and providers.

Different diseases, different needs: Patient preferences for gene therapy in lysosomal storage disorders, a probabilistic threshold technique survey

BACKGROUND

Gene therapy is currently in development for several monogenetic diseases including lysosomal storage disorders. Limited evidence is available on patient preferences for gene therapy in this population. In this study, we compare gene therapy-related risk tolerance between people affected by three lysosomal storage diseases currently faced with different therapeutic options and prognoses.

METHODS

A survey including the probabilistic threshold technique was developed in which respondents were asked to choose between gene therapy and the current standard of care. The attributes included to establish participants' risk tolerance were previously identified in focus groups of affected people or their representatives, namely: risk of mild side effects, severe side effects, the need for additional medication, and the likelihood of long-term effectiveness. The survey was distributed among people receiving outpatient care for type 1 Gaucher disease (good prognosis with current treatment options), Fabry disease (varying prognosis with current treatment options, XY-genotype on average more severely affected than XX), and parents representing people with severe forms of mucopolysaccharidosis type III A/B (poor prognosis, no disease-specific therapy available).

RESULTS

A total of 85 surveys were completed (15 Gaucher disease respondents, 62 Fabry disease respondents (17 self-identifying male), eight parents of ten people with mucopolysaccharidosis type III). Disease groups with higher disease severity trended towards higher risk tolerance: Gaucher disease respondents were most cautious and predominantly preferred the current standard of care as opposed to MPS III representatives who were more risk tolerant. Respondents with Fabry disease were most heterogeneous in their risk tolerance, with male participants being more risk tolerant than female participants. Long-term effectiveness was the attribute in which respondents tolerated the least risk.

CONCLUSIONS

People affected by a lysosomal storage disease associated with a poorer prognosis and less effective current treatment options trended towards more risk tolerance when choosing between gene therapy and the current standard of care. This study shows the importance of involvement of patient preferences before and during the development process of new treatment modalities such as gene therapy for rare diseases, to ensure that innovative therapies align with the wishes and needs of people affected by these diseases.

Doctors' experience providing primary care for refugee women living with chronic pain: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The experiences of GPs in Australia highlight key considerations regarding workload demands, remuneration incentives and the practical implications of working in regions with high ethnic density. This exploration helps to understand the elements that influence GPs delivery of care, particular for refugee women who exhibit disproportionately higher rates of chronic pain. This qualitative study explored the experiences of GPs providing care for refugee women living with chronic pain.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 10 GPs (9 female and 1 male) practicing across metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. GPs were recruited via purposive sampling and a snowballing strategy. Participants work experience ranged from one to 32 years. Audio recordings of the interviews were transcribed verbatim and stored in qualitative data Nvivo 12 software for coding. Transcripts of interviews were analysed thematically using a phenomenological approach.

RESULTS

Three overarching themes were identified: (1) meeting the needs of refugee women living with chronic pain; (2) the role of the GP; and (3) the challenges of the health care system. These themes reflected the complexity of consultations which arose, in part, from factors such as trust, the competencies of clinician's and the limitations posed by time, funding and interpreter use.

CONCLUSION

GPs acknowledged the uniqueness of refugee women's chronic pain needs and whilst doctors welcomed care, many were often challenged by the complex nature of consultations. Those that worked in settings that aligned with refugee women's needs highlighted the importance of cultivating culturally safe clinical environments and listening to their patients' stories. However, system level challenges such as time, funding and resource constraints created significant challenges for GPs. Exploring GPs experiences allows for a better understanding of how vectors of disadvantage intersect in health care and highlights the need to better support doctors to improve health care provision for refugee women living with chronic pain.

Public deliberation on health gain measures

Researchers and decision-makers use health gain measures to assess the value of health interventions. However, our current understanding of how these measures are understandable and accessible to the community is limited. This study examined a diverse group of stakeholders' attitudes and preferences for 9 commonly used health gain measures. We recruited 20 stakeholders, including patients, caregivers, pharmacists, allied health professionals, and citizens. We conducted 2 in-person deliberative meetings in which participants learned, discussed, deliberated on, and ranked 9 health gain measures. The final ranking conducted after unified deliberation showed the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) as the top-ranked measure, followed by the clinical benefit rating method used by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, and multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA). We identified 3 themes during deliberations: the importance of using patient values in population-based health gain measures, examining complementary measures together, and choosing measures that are intuitive and easy to understand. Future policymaking should consider incorporating the QALY, clinical benefit rating, and MCDA into prioritization decisions.

A systematic review of discrete choice experiments in stroke rehabilitation

OBJECTIVES

Existing research qualitatively explores consumer preferences for stroke rehabilitation interventions. However, it remains unclear which intervention characteristics are most important to consumers, and how these preferences may influence uptake and participation. Discrete choice experiments (DCE) provide a unique way to quantitatively measure preferences for health and health care. This study aims to explore how DCEs have been used in stroke rehabilitation and to identify reported consumer preferences for rehabilitation interventions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review of published stroke rehabilitation DCEs was completed (PROSPERO registration: CRD42021282578). Six databases (including CINAHL, MEDLINE, EconLIT) were searched from January 2000-March 2023. Data extracted included topic area, sample size, aim, attributes, design process, and preference outcomes. Descriptive and thematic analyses were conducted, and two methodological checklists applied to review quality.

RESULTS

Of 2,446 studies screened, five were eligible. Studies focused on exercise preference (n = 3), the structure and delivery of community services (n = 1), and self-management programs (n = 1). All had small sample sizes (range 50-146) and were of moderate quality (average score of 77%). Results indicated people have strong preferences for one-to-one therapy (over group-based), light-moderate intensity of exercise, and delivery by qualified therapists (over volunteers).

CONCLUSIONS

Few DCEs have been conducted in stroke rehabilitation, suggesting consumer preferences could be more rigorously explored. Included studies were narrow in the scope of attributes included, limiting their application to practice and policy. Further research is needed to assess the impact of differing service delivery models on uptake and participation.

Differences in Preferences for Drug Therapy Between Patients with Metastatic Versus Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Compared with early stages (eBC) metastatic BC (mBC) is incurable. In mBC, aggressive treatment may increase the duration of survival but may also cause severe treatment side effects. A better understanding how patients with BC value different aspects of drug therapy might improve treatment effectiveness, satisfaction and adherence. This systematic review aims to identify and summarise studies evaluating patient preferences for drug therapy of BC and to compare preferences of patients with eBC and mBC.

METHODS

The systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The electronic databases PubMed and Web of Science were searched on 22 June 2023. All studies published to this point were considered. Original studies reporting patient preferences on BC drug therapy determined by any type of choice experiment were eligible. A narrative synthesis of the effect measures presented as relative importance ratings, trade-offs (required benefit to make a therapy worthwhile) or monetary values of the treatment attributes was reported for each study. Risk of bias assessment for individual studies was performed using the checklist for observational studies from the STROBE Statement and the checklist from 'Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making: A User's Guide'. The study protocol was registered at the PROSPERO database (CRD42022377031).

RESULTS

A total of 34 studies met the inclusion criteria were included in the analysis evaluating the preferences of patients with eBC (n = 18), mBC (n = 10) or any stage BC (n = 6) on, for example, chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, hormonal therapy or CKD4/6-inhibitors using different types of choice experiments. Regardless of the stage, most patients valued treatment effectiveness in terms of survival gains higher than potential adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Treatment cost, mode of administration, treatment regimen and monitoring aspects were considered as least important treatment attributes. In addition, preferences concerning 16 different types of ADRs were described, showing high heterogeneity within BC stages. Yet, comparable results across BC stages were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of the stage, patients with BC consistently valued survival gains as the most important attribute and were willing to accept the risk of potential ADRs. Incorporating patient preferences in shared decision making may improve the effectiveness of interventions by enhancing adherence to drug therapy in patients suffering from BC.

Quality of Life of Colorectal Cancer Survivors: Mapping the Key Indicators by Expert Consensus and Measures for Their Assessment

Quality of life (QoL) assessments are integral to cancer care, yet their effectiveness in providing essential information for supporting survivors varies. This study aimed to elucidate key indicators of QoL among colorectal cancer survivors from the perspective of healthcare professionals, and to evaluate existing QoL questionnaires in relation to these indicators. Two studies were conducted: a Delphi study to identify key QoL indicators and a scoping review of questionnaires suitable for colorectal cancer survivors. Fifty-four healthcare professionals participated in the Delphi study's first round, with 25 in the second. The study identified two primary QoL domains (physical and psychological) and 17 subdomains deemed most critical. Additionally, a review of 12 questionnaires revealed two instruments assessing the most important general domains. The findings underscored a misalignment between existing assessment tools and healthcare professionals' clinical priorities in working with colorectal cancer survivors. To enhance support for survivors' QoL, efforts are needed to develop instruments that better align with the demands of routine QoL assessment in clinical practice.

Trade-offs between overall survival and side effects in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer: eliciting preferences of patients with primary and metastatic breast cancer using a discrete choice experiment

OBJECTIVES

There has been a recent proliferation in treatment options for patients with metastatic breast cancer. Such treatments often involve trade-offs between overall survival and side effects. Our study aims to estimate the trade-offs that could be used to inform decision-making at the individual and policy level.

DESIGN

We designed a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to look at preferences for avoiding severity levels of side effects when choosing treatment for metastatic breast cancer. Treatment attributes were: fatigue, nausea, diarrhoea, other side effects (peripheral neuropathy, hand-foot syndrome and mucositis) and urgent hospital admission and overall survival. Responses were analysed using an error component logit model. We estimated the relative importance of attributes and minimum acceptable survival for improvements in side effects.

SETTING

The DCE was completed online by UK residents with self-reported diagnoses of breast cancer.

PARTICIPANTS

105 respondents participated, of which 72 patients had metastatic breast cancer and 33 patients had primary breast cancer.

RESULTS

Overall survival had the largest relative importance, followed by other side effects, diarrhoea, nausea and fatigue. The risk of urgent hospital admission was not significant. While overall survival was the most important attribute, respondents were willing to forgo some absolute probability of overall survival for reductions in all Grade 2 side effects (12.02% for hand-foot syndrome, 11.01% for mucositis, 10.42% for peripheral neuropathy, 6.33% for diarrhoea and 3.62% for nausea). Grade 1 side effects were not significant, suggesting respondents have a general tolerance for them.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients are willing to forgo overall survival to avoid particular severity levels of side effects. Our results have implications for data collected in research studies and can help inform person-centred care and shared decision-making.

Understanding general practitioners' prescribing choices to patients with chronic low back pain: a discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND

Although NSAIDs are recommended as a first line analgesic treatment, opioids are very commonly prescribed to patients with low back pain (LBP) despite risks of harms.

AIM

This study aimed to determine factors contributing to general practitioners' (GPs') prescribing choices to patients with chronic LBP in a primary care setting.

METHOD

This discrete choice experiment (DCE) presented 210 GPs with hypothetical scenarios of a patient with chronic LBP. Participants chose their preferred treatment for each choice set, either the opioid, NSAID or neither. The scenarios varied by two patient attributes; non-specific LBP or LBP with referred leg pain (sciatica) and number of comorbidities. The three treatment attributes also varied, being: the type of opioid or NSAID, degree of pain reduction and number of adverse events. The significance of each attribute in influencing clinical decisions was the primary outcome and the degree to which GPs preferred the alternative based on the number of adverse events or the amount of pain reduction was the secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Overall, GPs preferred NSAIDs (45.2%, 95% CI 38.7-51.7%) over opioids (28.8%, 95% CI 23.0-34.7%), however there was no difference between the type of NSAID or opioid preferred. Additionally, the attributes of pain reduction and adverse events did not influence a GP's choice between NSAIDs or opioids for patients with chronic LBP.

CONCLUSION

GPs prefer prescribing NSAIDs over opioids for a patient with chronic low back pain regardless of patient factors of comorbidities or the presence of leg pain (i.e. sciatica).

Talking, not training, increased the accuracy of physicians' diagnosis of their patients' preferences for colon cancer screening

OBJECTIVE

Identify if primary care physicians (PCPs) accurately understand patient preferences for colorectal cancer (CRC) testing, whether shared decision making (SDM) training improves understanding of patient preferences, and whether time spent discussing CRC testing improves understanding of patient preferences.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of a trial comparing SDM training plus a reminder arm to a reminder alone arm. PCPs and their patients completed surveys after visits assessing whether they discussed CRC testing, patient testing preference, and time spent discussing CRC testing. We compared patient and PCP responses, calculating concordance between patient-physician dyads. Multilevel models tested for differences in preference concordance by arm or time discussing CRC.

RESULTS

382 PCP and patient survey dyads were identified. Most dyads agreed on whether CRC testing was discussed (82%). Only 52% of dyads agreed on the patient's preference. SDM training did not impact accuracy of PCPs preference diagnoses (55%v.48%,p = 0.22). PCPs were more likely to accurately diagnose patient's preferences when discussions occurred, regardless of length.

CONCLUSION

Only half of PCPs accurately identified patient testing preferences. Training did not impact accuracy. Visits where CRC testing was discussed resulted in PCPs better understanding patient preferences.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

PCPs should take time to discuss testing and elicit patient preferences.

Role Preferences in Medical Decision Making: Relevance and Implications for Health Preference Research

Health preference research (HPR) is being increasingly conducted to better understand patient preferences for medical decisions. However, patients vary in their desire to play an active role in medical decisions. Until now, few studies have considered patients' preferred roles in decision making. In this opinion paper, we advocate for HPR researchers to assess and account for role preferences in their studies, to increase the relevance of their work for medical and shared decision making. We provide recommendations on how role preferences can be elicited and integrated with health preferences: (1) in formative research prior to a health preference study that aims to inform medical decisions or decision makers, (2a) in the development of health preference instruments, for instance by incorporating a role preference instrument and (2b) by clarifying the respondent's role in the decision prior to the preference elicitation task or by including role preferences as an attribute in the task itself, and (3) in statistical analysis by including random parameters or latent classes to raise awareness of heterogeneity in role preferences and how it relates to health preferences. Finally, we suggest redefining the decision process as a model that integrates the role and health preferences of the different parties that are involved. We believe that the field of HPR would benefit from learning more about the extent to which role preferences relate to health preferences, within the context of medical and shared decision making.

Exploring the Important Determinants Shaping Treatment Preferences: Qualitative Insights into Breast Cancer Patient Experiences and Perspectives in New Zealand

Purpose

Despite the importance of acknowledging patient preferences in treatment decision-making, little is known about the treatment preferences and the factors underlying those preferences of breast cancer patients. This study aims explore patient experience and perspective regarding treatment preferences and identify the important determinants that shape these preferences in the context of New Zealand.

Patients and Methods

Semi-structured online interviews comprised of six focus group discussions and five individual interviews were performed with 26 breast cancer patients. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using the reflexive thematic analysis approach.

Results

Four main themes were derived: (1) positive treatment outcomes; (2) the negative impact of treatment-related side effects on quality of life; (3) treatment accessibility, availability, and timeliness; (4) cost of treatment. Patients revealed a strong preference towards treatments that yield longer survival, achieve remission, and prevent cancer recurrence. Additionally, patients favored treatments with minimal side effects that had minimal impact on their quality of life. There was a notable preference for treatments that were easily accessible and available in a timely manner. However, patients faced challenging decisions in balancing the costs of treatments with their benefits, leading to a consistent preference for treatments supported by government funding or medical insurance to alleviate financial burdens.

Conclusion

Our study reveals that breast cancer patients in New Zealand have different perceptions and preferences regarding cancer treatment. Patients frequently find themselves making trade-offs among various attributes of a treatment, aligning these decisions with their personal values and beliefs. By considering these preferences and trade-offs in future studies that measure patient preferences, healthcare professionals can enhance their support for patients in making informed choices that align with their values and priorities. Additionally, healthcare policymakers can develop patient-centered policies that cater to the unique needs and preferences of breast cancer patients.

Patient perspectives of diabetes care in primary care networks in Singapore: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) remains an important chronic condition worldwide requiring integrated patient-centred care as advocated by the Chronic Care Model (CCM). The Primary Care Networks (PCNs) in Singapore organise general practitioners (GPs) with nurses and care coordinators to deliver team-based care for patients with chronic conditions. This study examined the quality of care in the PCNs as defined by the CCM from the patients' perspective.

METHODS

This study followed a cross-sectional convergent mixed-method design with T2D patients across three PCN types (GP-led, Group, and Cluster). The Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC, range 1-5) was completed by a convenience sample of 343 patients. Multivariate linear regression was performed to estimate the associations between patient and service characteristics and PACIC summary score. Twenty-four participants were purposively recruited for interviews on the experienced care until thematic saturation was reached. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected concurrently and independently. Integration occurred during study design and data analysis using the CCM as guidance. Quantitative and qualitative results were compared side-by-side in a joint comparison table to develop key concepts supported by themes, subthemes, and patients' quotes.

RESULTS

The PACIC mean summary score of 3.21 for 343 patients evidenced that some have received CCM consistent care in the PCNs. Being younger and spending more time with the GP were associated with higher PACIC summary scores. PACIC summary scores did not differ across PCN types. The 24 patients interviewed in the qualitative study reported receiving team-based care, nurse services, good continuity of care, as well as patient-centred care, convenient access, and affordable care. Key concepts showed that integrated care consistent with the CCM was sometimes received by patients in the PCNs. Patient activation, delivery system design/decision support, goal setting/tailoring, and problem-solving/contextual counselling were sometimes received by patients, while follow-up/coordination was generally not received.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with T2D from the Singapore Primary Care Networks received integrated care consistent with the Chronic Care Model, particularly in patient activation, delivery system design/decision support, goal setting/tailoring, and problem-solving/contextual counselling. Follow-up/coordination needed improvement to ensure higher quality of diabetes care.

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.

Patient and Physician Preferences for Acute Myeloid Leukemia Maintenance Treatments Following Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Purpose

This study assessed and compared preferences for treatment attributes of maintenance therapies post-hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and in physicians who treat these patients.

Patients and Methods

Patients with AML post HSCT and physicians from the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia (physicians only) completed a web-based discrete choice experiment (DCE). The DCE used inputs identified via a targeted literature review and qualitative interviews to ascertain relevant treatment attributes and associated levels. Six treatment attributes were selected (chance of 2-year relapse-free survival, quality of life [QoL], risk of serious infections, risk of nausea, chance of achieving transfusion independence, and duration of hospitalization annually), each with three or four levels. The experimental design included 36 choice tasks that presented a pair of hypothetical treatment profiles with varying attribute levels; participants chose a preferred treatment for each choice task. Choice tasks were divided into three blocks of 12 tasks each in the patient survey and 4 blocks of 9 tasks each in the physician survey; survey participants were randomly assigned to one of the blocks. Random parameter logit regression models were used to assess the impact of stated attributes on preferences for maintenance treatment post HSCT.

Results

Surveys from 84 patients and 149 physicians were assessed. For patients, QoL was the most important attribute, followed by duration of hospitalization and chance of 2-year relapse-free survival. For physicians, chance of 2-year relapse-free survival was the most important attribute, followed by QoL and risk of serious infections.

Conclusion

Differences in how patients and physicians valued post-HSCT maintenance treatment attributes were identified. These differences suggest that patient-centered decision-making may help physicians choose maintenance treatments for patients with AML post HSCT that better meet their treatment needs and improve their treatment satisfaction.

Understanding Patient Preferences Regarding the Important Determinants of Breast Cancer Treatment: A Narrative Scoping Review

Objective

Conventionally, optimal treatment strategies for breast cancer have been largely determined by physicians, with a scant understanding of patients' treatment values and preferences. Incorporating patient preferences in the decision-making process for breast cancer treatment is gaining recognition and can potentially improve treatment outcomes and compliance. This scoping review aims to synthesize evidence on the key determinants that are most valued by breast cancer patients when deciding on their treatment options.

Methods

We searched three electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and CINAHL Plus) utilizing a systematic scoping review method. Two reviewers independently screened, applied inclusion criteria, reviewed, and synthesized findings. A mixed-method narrative approach combining the inductive thematic analysis and content analysis methodologies was used to synthesize and summarize the findings.

Results

The review included 22 studies, leading to the conceptualization of 5 overarching themes and 17 sub-themes. Among these, the most frequently cited theme was treatment benefits, followed by treatment-related process, treatment-related risk, quality of life, and cost of treatment. Women with breast cancer highly value treatments that offer good effectiveness, prolong survival, prevent recurrence, and maintain quality of life. Patient concerns include treatment-related side effects, safety, the risk of secondary cancer, and direct or indirect out-of-pocket costs. Additionally, patients also consider treatment duration, mode of administration, physician recommendation, and treatment availability and accessibility when deciding on their preferred treatment.

Conclusion

The evidence synthesized in this review offers insights into refining breast cancer treatment strategies to align more closely with patient values. Recognizing and integrating patient perspectives in breast cancer care could potentially lead to improved treatment outcomes, enhanced patient compliance, and more personalized care. Healthcare professionals are encouraged to incorporate these key determinants in their treatment decision-making processes, aiming to deliver a patient-centered care that aligns with the unique preferences and values of each patient.

The Perspective of Patients and Health Professionals on the Prioritization of Assisted Reproductive Techniques. The PRIOFER Study

Purpose

To determine the perspective of patients and professionals in Assisted Reproduction Units (ARU) on the importance of assisted reproductive techniques (ART) compared to other elective procedures, to highlight the relevance of ART as an elective procedure and the impact of delayed interventions on patients.

Design Patients and Methods

An observational, descriptive, cross-sectional, online survey-based study was conducted in infertility patients and partners (n=98) and ARU healthcare professionals (n=83). The survey included a best-worst scaling (BWS) experiment and an ad-hoc questionnaire to analyze the pandemic impact on ART management and infertility patients in Spain. In the BWS, each respondent established priorities choosing which patient profile should be rated as the highest and lowest priority profile on a waiting list. To understand the importance that they give to assisted reproduction compared to other procedures, three very common elective procedures involving different patient profiles were selected: cataract surgery, knee arthroplasty, and varicose vein surgery. For each procedure, three hypothetical patient profiles corresponding to three different degrees of severity on a waiting list were designed.

Results

Patients attributed greater importance to ART profiles (BWS score: patients 0.14 vs professionals -0.05; p<0.01) whereas professionals prioritized cataract surgery (patients 0.06 vs professionals 0.23; p<0.01). Concerning the profile severity, more severe profiles were prioritized in all procedures by both groups. Patients' and professionals' perspectives on the impact of the pandemic were similar, with exceptions: information received for resuming ART; health care provision in crisis situations; and reduction of parenting options. The pandemic affected patients' ability to conceive a child (70.4% of those surveyed), their psychological well-being (75.5%), and partner, social, and work relationships (69.4%).

Conclusion

Preference studies involving patients and professionals can provide important information to define framework criteria for the management of waiting lists for elective procedures, and to prioritize interventions during pandemic periods. The pandemic impact on infertility patients highlights the relevance of developing measures and strategies to cope with similar future situations in the most appropriate way.

Patient Preferences for Pain Control After Mohs Micrographic Surgery: A Single-Center Discrete Choice Experiment

Importance

Patient preferences for pain medications after Mohs micrographic surgery are important to understand and have not been fully studied.

Objective

To evaluate patient preferences for pain management with only over-the-counter medications (OTCs) or OTCs plus opioids after Mohs micrographic surgery given varying levels of theoretical pain and opioid addiction risk.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This prospective discrete choice experiment was conducted in a single academic medical center from August 2021 to April 2022 among patients undergoing Mohs surgery and their accompanying support persons (≥18 years). A prospective survey was administered to all participants using the Conjointly platform. Data were analyzed from May 2022 to February 2023.

Main outcome and measure

The primary outcome was the pain level at which half of the respondents chose OTCs plus opioids equally to only OTCs for pain management. This pain threshold was determined for varying opioid addiction risk profiles (low, 0%; low-moderate, 2%; moderate-high, 6%; high, 12%) and measured via a discrete choice experiment and linear interpolation of associated parameters (pain levels and risk of addiction).

Results

Of the 295 respondents (mean [SD] age, 64.6 [13.1] years; 174 [59%] were female; race and ethnicity were not considered) who completed the discrete choice experiment, 101 (34%) stated that they would never consider opioids for pain management regardless of the pain level experienced, and 147 (50%) expressed concern regarding possible opioid addiction. Across all scenarios, 224 respondents (76%) preferred only OTCs vs OTCs plus opioids after Mohs surgery for pain control. When the theoretical risk of addiction was low (0%), half of the respondents expressed a preference for OTCs plus opioids given pain levels of 6.5 on a 10-point scale (90% CI, 5.7-7.5). At higher opioid addiction risk profiles (2%, 6%, 12%), an equal preference for OTCs plus opioids and only OTCs was not achieved. In these scenarios, patients favored only OTCs despite experiencing high levels of pain.

Conclusion and relevance

The findings of this prospective discrete choice experiment indicate that the perceived risk of opioid addiction affects the patient's choice of pain medications after Mohs surgery. It is important to engage patients undergoing Mohs surgery in shared decision-making discussions to determine the optimal pain control plan for each individual. These findings may encourage future research on the risks associated with long-term opioid use after Mohs surgery.

Does doctors' personality differ from those of patients, the highly educated and other caring professions? An observational study using two nationally representative Australian surveys

OBJECTIVES

Personality differences between doctors and patients can affect treatment outcomes. We examine these trait disparities, as well as differences across medical specialities.

DESIGN

Retrospective, observational statistical analysis of secondary data.

SETTING

Data from two data sets that are nationally representative of doctors and the general population in Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

We include 23 358 individuals from a representative survey of the general Australian population (with subgroups of 18 705 patients, 1261 highly educated individuals and 5814 working in caring professions) as well as 19 351 doctors from a representative survey of doctors in Australia (with subgroups of 5844 general practitioners, 1776 person-oriented specialists and 3245 technique-oriented specialists).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Big Five personality traits and locus of control. Measures are standardised by gender, age and being born overseas and weighted to be representative of their population.

RESULTS

Doctors are significantly more agreeable (a: standardised score -0.12, 95% CIs -0.18 to -0.06), conscientious (c: -0.27 to -0.33 to -0.20), extroverted (e: 0.11, 0.04 to 0.17) and neurotic (n: 0.14, CI 0.08 to 0.20) than the general population (a: -0.38 to -0.42 to -0.34, c: -0.96 to -1.00 to -0.91, e: -0.22 to -0.26 to -0.19, n: -1.01 to -1.03 to -0.98) or patients (a: -0.77 to -0.85 to -0.69, c: -1.27 to -1.36 to -1.19, e: -0.24 to -0.31 to -0.18, n: -0.71 to -0.76 to -0.66). Patients (-0.03 to -0.10 to 0.05) are more open than doctors (-0.30 to -0.36 to -0.23). Doctors have a significantly more external locus of control (0.06, 0.00 to 0.13) than the general population (-0.10 to -0.13 to -0.06) but do not differ from patients (-0.04 to -0.11 to 0.03). There are minor differences in personality traits among doctors with different specialities.

CONCLUSIONS

Several personality traits differ between doctors, the population and patients. Awareness about differences can improve doctor-patient communication and allow patients to understand and comply with treatment recommendations.

What influences slum residents' choices of healthcare providers for common illnesses? Findings of a Discrete Choice Experiment in Ibadan, Nigeria

Urban slum residents have access to a broad range of facilities of varying quality. The choices they make can significantly influence their health outcomes. Discrete Choice Experiments (DCEs) are a widely-used health economic methodology for understanding how individuals make trade-offs between attributes of goods or services when choosing between them. We carried out a DCE to understand these trade-offs for residents of an urban slum in Ibadan, Nigeria. We conducted 48 in-depth interviews with slum residents to identify key attributes influencing their decision to access health care. We also developed three symptom scenarios worded to be consistent with, but not pathegonian of, malaria, cholera, and depression. This led to the design of a DCE involving eight attributes with 2-4 levels for each. A D-efficient design was created, and data was collected from 557 residents between May 2021 and July 2021. Conditional-logit models were fitted to these data initially. Mixed logit and latent class models were also fitted to explore preference heterogeneity. Conditional logit results suggested a substantial Willingness-to-pay (WTP) for attributes associated with quality. WTP estimates across scenarios 1/2/3 were N5282 / N6080 / N3715 for the government over private ownership, N2599 / N5827 / N2020 for seeing a doctor rather than an informal provider and N2196 / N5421 /N4987 for full drug availability over none. Mixed logit and latent class models indicated considerable preference heterogeneity, with the latter suggesting a substantial minority valuing private over government facilities. Higher income and educational attainment were predictive of membership of this minority. Our study suggests that slum residents value and are willing to pay for high-quality care regarding staff qualifications and drug availability. It further suggests substantial variation in the perception of private providers. Therefore, improved access to government facilities and initiatives to improve the quality of private providers are complementary strategies for improving overall care received.

Personalized medicine in rheumatoid arthritis: Combining biomarkers and patient preferences to guide therapeutic decisions

The last few decades have seen major therapeutic advancements in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) therapeutics. New disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have continued to emerge, creating more choices for people. However, no therapeutic works for all patients. Each has its own inherent benefits, risks, costs, dosing, and monitoring considerations. In parallel, there has been a focus on personalized medicine initiatives that tailor therapeutic decisions to patients based on their unique characteristics or biomarkers. Personalized effect estimates require an understanding of a patient's baseline probability of response to treatment and data on the comparative effectiveness of the available treatments. However, even if accurate risk prediction models are available, trade-offs often still need to be made between treatments. In this paper, we review the history of RA therapeutics and progress that has been made toward personalized risk predictive models for DMARDs, outlining where knowledge gaps still exist. We further review why patient preferences play a key role in a holistic view of personalized medicine and how this links with shared decision-making. We argue that a "preference misdiagnosis" may be equally important as a medical misdiagnosis but is often overlooked.

Integrating Patient and Expert Perspectives to Conceptualize High-Quality Palliative Cancer Care for Symptoms in the US Veterans Health Administration: A Qualitative Study

Quality measurement is typically the domain of clinical experts and health system leaders; patient/caregiver perspectives are rarely solicited. We aimed to describe and integrate clinician and patient/caregiver conceptualizations of high-quality palliative symptom care for patients receiving care for advanced cancer within the US Veterans Health Administration in the context of existing quality measures. We conducted a secondary qualitative analysis of transcripts from prioritization discussions of process quality measures relevant to cancer palliative care. These discussions occurred during 2 modified RAND-UCLA appropriateness panels: a panel of 10 palliative care clinical expert stakeholders (7 physicians, 2 nurses, 1 social worker) and a panel of 9 patients/caregivers with cancer experience. Discussions were recorded, transcribed, and independently double-coded using an a priori logical framework. Content analysis was used to identify subthemes within codes and axial coding was used to identify crosscutting themes. Patients/caregivers and clinical experts contributed important perspectives to 3 crosscutting themes. First, proactive elicitation of symptoms is critical. Patients/caregivers especially emphasized importance of comprehensive and proactive screening and assessment, especially for pain and mental health. Second, screening and assessment alone is not enough; information elicited from patients must inform care. Measuring screening/assessment and management care processes separately has important limitations. Lastly, high-quality symptom management can be broadly defined if it is patient-centered; high-quality care takes an individualized approach and might include non-medical or non-pharmacological symptom management. Integrating the perspectives of clinical experts and patients/caregivers is critical for health systems to consider as they design and implement quality measures for palliative cancer care.

A discrete-choice experiment study of physicians' prioritization of attributes of medical treatments for endometriosis-associated pain

BACKGROUND

Physicians' preferences for attributes of medical treatments for endometriosis-associated pain have not previously been quantified.

METHODS

US obstetrician-gynecologists completed an online discrete-choice experiment survey. In a series of questions, physicians chose a medical treatment for a hypothetical patient with endometriosis experiencing severe, persistent dysmenorrhea, nonmenstrual pelvic pain, and/or dyspareunia. Each question presented two hypothetical medical treatments for endometriosis-associated pain, defined by seven attributes with varying levels. Preferences weights and conditional relative importance (CRI) were calculated using a random-parameters logit model.

RESULTS

Respondents (N = 250) had an average age of 53 years; 36% were female. The most important attribute, conditional on the attributes and levels evaluated, was risk of moderate-to-severe hot flashes (CRI, 3.34). In descending order of importance, the CRIs of the other attributes were 2.13 for improvement in nonmenstrual pelvic pain, 2.04 for improvement in dyspareunia, 1.88 for improvement in dysmenorrhea, 1.16 for risk of pregnancy-related complications if pregnancy occurs during treatment, 0.62 for increased risk of bone fracture later in life, and 0.48 for mode of administration.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to valuing pain reduction, respondents prioritized avoiding moderate-to-severe hot flashes, followed by less common and less immediate risks of pregnancy-related complications and bone fracture.

Integrating patient values and preferences in healthcare: a systematic review of qualitative evidence

OBJECTIVES

To identify and thematically analyse how healthcare professionals (HCPs) integrate patient values and preferences ('values integration') in primary care for adults with non-communicable diseases (NCDs).

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-aggregation methods were used for extraction, synthesis and analysis of qualitative evidence.

DATA SOURCES

Relevant records were sourced using keywords to search 12 databases (ASSIA, CINAHL, DARE, EMBASE, ERIC, Google Scholar, GreyLit, Ovid-MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed-MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science).

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Records needed to be published between 2000 and 2020 and report qualitative methods and findings in English involving HCP participants regarding primary care for adult patients.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Relevant data including participant quotations, authors' observations, interpretations and conclusions were extracted, synthesised and analysed in a phased approach using a modified version of the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Data Extraction Tool, as well as EPPI Reviewer and NVivo software. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research was used to assess methodological quality of included records.

RESULTS

Thirty-one records involving >1032 HCP participants and 1823 HCP-patient encounters were reviewed. Findings included 143 approaches to values integration in clinical care, thematically analysed and synthesised into four themes: (1) approaches of concern; (2) approaches of competence; (3) approaches of communication and (4) approaches of congruence. Confidence in the quality of included records was deemed high.

CONCLUSIONS

HCPs incorporate patient values and preferences in healthcare through a variety of approaches including showing concern for the patient as a person, demonstrating competence at managing diseases, communicating with patients as partners and tailoring, adjusting and balancing overall care. Themes in this review provide a novel framework for understanding and addressing values integration in clinical care and provide useful insights for policymakers, educators and practitioners.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020166002.

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.

The application of discrete choice experiments eliciting young peoples' preferences for healthcare: a systematic literature review

OBJECTIVES

Understanding young people's preferences for healthcare is critical for reducing the negative effect of undesirable choices. This review aims to synthesise the evidence obtained from discrete choice experiments (DCEs) eliciting young people's preferences for healthcare interventions and service deliveries, specifically, to (1) examine the methodology, including a selection of attributes and levels, experimental design, estimation procedure and validity; (2) evaluate similarities, differences and rigour of designs to the general population DCEs; and, (3) compare the DCEs' application to the seven health priority areas defined by the World Health Organisation (WHO).

METHODS

A systematic review searching Medline, EconLIT, PsychINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed up until May 2021.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

a DCE, eliciting young peoples' preferences (10-24 years of age), on a healthcare-related topic defined by WHO, peer-reviewed, full-text available in English. A bespoke checklist was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies.

RESULTS

Eighteen DCE studies were included in the review, exploring interventions and service in sexual and reproductive health (n = 9; 50%), smoking cessation (n = 4; 22%), mental health (n = 1), nutrition (n = 1), unintentional injuries (n = 1), vaccination against severe but rare diseases (n = 1); and diabetes (n = 1). Compared to the general population, DCEs eliciting young people's preferences had a high proportion of monetary measures and a smaller number of choices per respondent with the overwhelming number of surveys using fractional factorial design. The majority of studies were of moderate quality (50-75% of the criteria met).

CONCLUSIONS

While identified DCEs touched on most health priority areas, the scope was limited. The conduct and reporting of DCEs with young people could be improved by including the state-of-the-art design, estimation procedures and analysis.

Do patients' preferences prevail in hospital selection?: a comparison between discrete choice experiments and revealed hospital choice

Background

In patient choice, patients are expected to select the provider that best fits their preferences. In this study, we assess to what extent the hospital choice of patients in practice corresponds with their preferred choice.

Methods

Dutch patients with breast cancer (n = 631) and cataract (n = 1109) were recruited. We employed a discrete choice experiment (DCE) per condition to measure stated preferences and predict the distribution of patients across four hospitals. Each DCE included five attributes: patient experiences, a clinical outcome indicator, waiting time, travel distance and whether the hospital had been recommended (e.g., by the General Practitioner (GP)). Revealed choices were derived from claims data.

Results

Hospital quality was valued as most important in the DCE; the largest marginal rates of substitution (willingness to wait) were observed for the clinical outcome indicator (breast cancer: 38.6 days (95% confidence interval (95%CI): 32.9–44.2); cataract: 210.5 days (95%CI: 140.8–280.2)). In practice, it was of lesser importance. In revealed choices, travel distance became the most important attribute; it accounted for 85.5% (breast cancer) and 95.5% (cataract) of the log-likelihood. The predicted distribution of patients differed from that observed in practice in terms of absolute value and, for breast cancer, also in relative order. Similar results were observed in population weighted analyses.

Discussion

Study findings show that patients highly valued quality information in the choice for a hospital. However, in practice these preferences did not prevail. Our findings suggest that GPs played a major role and that patients mostly ended up selecting the nearest hospital.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08403-6.

Clinician preferences for neurotechnologies in pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy: A discrete choice experiment

OBJECTIVE

Novel and minimally invasive neurotechnologies offer the potential to reduce the burden of epilepsy while avoiding the risks of conventional resective surgery. Few neurotechnologies have been tested in randomized controlled trials with pediatric populations, leaving clinicians to face decisions about whether to recommend these treatments with insufficient evidence about the relevant risks and benefits. This study specifically explores the preferences of clinicians for treating pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) with novel neurotechnologies.

METHODS

A discrete-choice experiment (DCE) was designed to elicit the preferences of clinicians with experience in treating children with DRE using novel neurotechnological interventions. The preferences for six key attributes used when making treatment decisions (chances of clinically significant improvement in seizures, major and minor risks from intervention, availability of evidence, financial burden for the family, and access to the intervention) were estimated using a conditional logit model. The estimates from this model were then used to predict the adoption of existing novel neurotechnological interventions.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight clinicians completed the survey: 33 neurosurgeons, 28 neurologists, and 7 other clinicians. Most clinicians were working in the United States (74%), and the remainder (26%) in Canada. All attributes, apart from the nearest location with access to the intervention, influenced preferences significantly. The chance of clinically significant improvement in seizures was the most positive influence on clinician preferences, but low-quality evidence and a higher risk of major complications could offset these preferences. Of the existing neurotechnological interventions, vagus nerve stimulation was predicted to have the highest likelihood of adoption; deep brain stimulation had the lowest likelihood of adoption.

SIGNIFICANCE

The preferences of clinicians are drive primarily by the likelihood of achieving seizure freedom for their patients, but preferences for an intervention are largely eradicated if only low quality of evidence supporting the intervention is available. Until better evidence supporting the use of potentially effective, novel neurotechnologies becomes available, clinicians are likely to prefer more established treatments.

Preference Testing in Medical Devices: Current Framework and Regulatory Gaps

Preference testing is a valuable source of information that can be provided by both healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients (users). It can be used to improve the design and development of medical devices by feeding into device usability and, ultimately, risk management. Furthermore, it can aid with selecting the most appropriate clinical endpoints to be used in the clinical evaluation of a device and increase patient engagement by incorporating patient-relevant outcomes. Preference testing is widely conducted in the food industry but is not widespread in the medical field due to limited guidelines and a lack of regulatory framework. As such, manufacturers may be unaware of the benefits of preference testing and fail to take full advantage of it, or conversely, may use inappropriate methodology and/or analyses and consequently fail to collect meaningful data. In this position paper, we aim to highlight the benefits and uses of preference testing, along with potential methods that could be used for preference testing of medical devices. A key step towards the wider implementation of preference testing in medical devices is for the publication of international standards and guidelines for the collection, assessment, and implementation of preference data into the life cycle of a medical device.

Development of a Patient-Centered Preference Tool for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

The approval of novel therapies for patients diagnosed with hematologic malignancies have improved survival outcomes but increased the challenge of aligning chemotherapy choices with patient preferences. We previously developed paper versions of a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and a best-worst scaling (BWS) instrument to quantify the treatment outcome preferences of patients with hematologic malignancies to inform shared decision making.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to develop an electronic health care tool (EHT) to guide clinical decision making that uses either a BWS or DCE instrument to capture patient preferences. The primary objective of this study is to use both qualitative and quantitative methods to evaluate the perceived usability, cognitive workload (CWL), and performance of electronic prototypes that include the DCE and BWS instrument.

METHODS

This mixed methods study includes iterative co-design methods that will involve healthy volunteers, patient-caregiver pairs, and health care workers to evaluate the perceived usability, CWL, and performance of tasks within distinct prototypes. Think-aloud sessions and semistructured interviews will be conducted to collect qualitative data to develop an affinity diagram for thematic analysis. Validated assessments (Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire [PSSUQ] and the National Aeronautical and Space Administration's Task Load Index [NASA-TLX]) will be used to evaluate the usability and CWL required to complete tasks within the prototypes. Performance assessments of the DCE and BWS will include the evaluation of tasks using the Single Easy Questionnaire (SEQ), time to complete using the prototype, and the number of errors. Additional qualitative assessments will be conducted to gather participants' feedback on visualizations used in the Personalized Treatment Preferences Dashboard that provides a representation of user results after completing the choice tasks within the prototype.

RESULTS

Ethical approval was obtained in June 2021 from the Institutional Review Board of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The DCE and BWS instruments were developed and incorporated into the PRIME (Preference Reporting to Improve Management and Experience) prototype in early 2021 and prototypes were completed by June 2021. Heuristic evaluations were conducted in phase 1 and completed by July 2021. Recruitment of healthy volunteers began in August 2021 and concluded in September 2021. In December 2021, our findings from phase 2 were accepted for publication. Phase 3 recruitment began in January 2022 and is expected to conclude in September 2022. The data analysis from phase 3 is expected to be completed by November 2022.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings will help differentiate the usability, CWL, and performance of the DCE and BWS within the prototypes. These findings will contribute to the optimization of the prototypes, leading to the development of an EHT that helps facilitate shared decision making. This evaluation will inform the development of EHTs to be used clinically with patients and health care workers.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/39586.

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.

Valuing quality in mental healthcare: A discrete choice experiment eliciting preferences from mental healthcare service users, mental healthcare professionals and the general population

High and sustained healthcare quality is important worldwide, though health policy may prioritise the achievement of certain aspects of quality over others. This study determines the relative importance of different aspects of mental healthcare quality to different stakeholders by eliciting preferences in a UK sample using a discrete choice experiment (DCE). DCE attributes were generated using triangulation between policy documents and mental healthcare service user and mental healthcare professional views, whilst ensuring attributes were measurable using available data. Ten attributes were selected: waiting times; ease of access; person-centred care; co-ordinated approach; continuity; communication, capacity and resources; treated with dignity and respect; recovery focus; inappropriate discharge; quality of life (QoL). The DCE was conducted online (December 2018 to February 2019) with mental healthcare service users (n = 331), mental healthcare professionals (n = 510), and members of the general population (n = 1018). Respondents' choices were analysed using conditional logistic regression. Relative preferences for each attribute were generated using the marginal rate of substitution (MRS) with QoL as numeraire. Across all stakeholders, being treated with dignity and respect was of high importance. A coordinated approach was important across all stakeholders, whereas communication had higher relative importance for healthcare professionals and service users and ease of access had higher relative importance for the general population. This implies that policy could be affected by the choice of whose preferences (service users, healthcare professionals or general population) to use, since this impacts on the relative value and implied ranking of different aspects of mental healthcare quality.

Advance care planning: comparing the views of residents and healthcare professionals in nursing homes in Singapore

BACKGROUND

With more frail elderly living and likely to die in nursing homes, advance care planning (ACP) is critical in overall efforts to provide good palliative care. However, it is unclear how willing older, vulnerable residents in nursing homes are to take on an active role in care decisions.

AIM

The objective of this pilot study was to examine nursing homes' healthcare professionals' and residents' views on ACP and the extent of similarities and differences in their views.

METHODS

Our sample of 24 healthcare professionals and 24 residents were identified and recruited through contacts established from existing collaborations with the nursing homes. Surveys were administered to the participants by a trained research assistant between April 2015 and August 2015.

RESULTS

Almost all the healthcare professionals (95.8%) would like to make an ACP for themselves in the future, while residents were divided in their choices (P<<0.01). Most residents (79.1%) felt that the most important guide for their surrogate in making decisions for them when they lose decision-making capacity should be based on their best interests. However, most healthcare professionals (75.0%) felt that it should be based on the resident's wishes and values.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare professionals tended to overestimate the importance of patient autonomy compared to the residents. This study demonstrates that as much as advocacy and awareness are ongoing, nursing home residents' motivation to participate in ACP is lacking. The lack of motivation in ACP participation could be due to medical paternalism and familial determination, which have been a cultural norm for older Singaporeans. This study demonstrates there is a lack of cultural sensitivity in this group of healthcare professionals in approaching nursing home residents' end-of-life care decision-making.

Colorectal cancer screening preferences among physicians and individuals at average risk: A discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND

Guidelines include several options for average-risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening that vary in aspects such as invasiveness, recommended frequency, and precision. Thus, patient and provider preferences can help identify an appropriate screening strategy. This study elicited CRC screening preferences of physicians and individuals at average risk for CRC (IAR).

METHODS

IAR aged 45-75 years and licensed physicians (primary care or gastroenterology) completed an online discrete choice experiment (DCE). Participants were recruited from representative access panels in the US. Within the DCE, participants traded off preferences between screening type, screening frequency, true-positive, true-negative, and adenoma true positive (physicians only). A mixed logit model was used to obtain predicted choice probabilities for colonoscopy, multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA), fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and methylated septin 9 (mSEPT9) blood test.

RESULTS

Preferences of IAR and physicians were affected by screening precision and screening type. IAR also valued more regular screening. Physicians preferred colonoscopy (96.8%) over mt-sDNA (2.8%; p < 0.001), FIT (0.3%; p < 0.001) and mSEPT9 blood test (0.1%; p < 0.01). IAR preferred mt-sDNA (38.8%) over colonoscopy (32.5%; p < 0.001), FIT (19.2%; p < 0.001), and mSEPT9 blood test (9.4%; p < 0.001). IAR naïve to screening preferred non-invasive screening (p < 0.001), while the opposite was found for those who previously underwent colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

While physicians overwhelmingly preferred colonoscopy, preferences of IAR were heterogenous, with mt-sDNA being most frequently preferred on average. Offering choices in addition to colonoscopy could improve CRC screening uptake among IAR. This study used a discrete choice experiment in the US to elicit preferences of physicians and individuals at average risk for colorectal cancer screening modalities and their characteristics.

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.

Interpersonal (mis)perceptions and (mis)predictions in patient-clinician interactions

Patient-clinician interactions require an interpersonal exchange of information, preferences, expectations, values, and priorities. Given the brief interaction patients and clinicians are allowed, many barriers to effective communication exist, resulting in patients and clinicians leaving an interaction with discordant perceptions of what has occurred and what is to come. We review literature on concordance and lack thereof, between patient and clinician perceptions, reasons why discordance may occur, how to decrease discordance as well as how dischordance impacts patient care and outcomes.

One Fraction Size Does Not Fit All: Patient Preferences for Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy From a Discrete Choice Experiment

PURPOSE

Hypofractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is a standard of care option for localized prostate cancer. To inform clinical practice we quantified patients' preferences for convenience, efficacy, and toxicity risks, of conventional, moderate hypofractionation, and stereotactic radiation therapy regimens.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We used a discrete choice experiment with a voluntary sample consisting of patients treated with EBRT for localized prostate cancer at our academic cancer center. In 2019, 58 participants, mean (SD) age of 72.9 (7.1) years, agreed to complete an in-person 1:1 discrete choice experiment. Each participant made 12 choices between 2 unique EBRT scenarios, each described by 5 attributes: (1) treatment time; (2) fiducial markers; and risk of (3) prostate specific antigen recurrence; (4) acute and (5) late GI or GU toxicity. Patient preferences were estimated using mixed multinomial logistic regression, and prespecified subgroups with conditional logistic regression.

RESULTS

All attributes were statistically significant, thus influenced participants' choices. Risks of prostate specific antigen recurrence (β = -2.581), late (β = -1.854), and acute (β = -1.005) toxicity were most important to participants (P < .001 for each), followed by EBRT length (β = -0.728; P = .017) and fiducial marker implantation (β = -0.563; P = .004). Older (β = -0.063; 95% confidence interval, -0.12, -0.01) and rural (β = -0.083; 95% CI -0.14, -0.02) participants significantly preferred shorter EBRT and were less willing-to-extend treatment to reduce toxicity risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with prostate cancer place importance on EBRT attributes, and some are willing to trade-off increased risk of toxicity for improved convenience. Our findings promote shared clinical decision-making because patients are interested in learning about the trade-offs involved.

Preferred Strategies for Delivering Health Information to Patients With Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Patients' information needs may differ from what their care providers may perceive to be the patients' needs. This discordance needs to be recognized and addressed.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a qualitative study to explore the perceptions of patients with selected musculoskeletal disorders and those of rheumatologists, on their preferred strategies for delivery of disease management information.

METHODS

Fifty-two patients diagnosed with either rheumatoid arthritis, knee osteoarthritis, or osteoporosis took part in 6 focus groups and 18 individual semistructured interviews. In addition, 11 rheumatologists participated in 2 focus groups and 4 semistructured individual interviews. Data were explored by thematic content analysis. Perceived preferences were identified and compared between patients and rheumatologists regarding (a) media, (b) setting, (c) messengers, and (d) key message content.

RESULTS

Patients' preferred media for disease management information were electronic (television and videos delivered as digital optical discs or the Internet), group instruction, and printed material. Patients preferred the information to be delivered in the setting of their homes, doctor's offices, or clinic waiting areas by the rheumatologists and patients with disease experience, addressing healthy lifestyle changes, medication adherence, and consequences of noncompliance. For rheumatologists, the perceived preference for information delivery was through printed material (brochures, booklets, and pamphlets) delivered in waiting areas by nurses and physicians, addressing nature of the disease, complications, and treatment adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Provider perspectives on strategies for education may differ from those of patients. Our findings highlight the need for considering different stakeholder perspectives in designing educational tools and decision support materials for patients with chronic diseases.

TAKEHOME MESSAGE

Rheumatologists' preferences on strategies for education (mode of delivery, delivery setting, messengers, and topics) differ from those of patients. For example, patients want to learn about lifestyle changes and consequences of compliance versus noncompliance, whereas rheumatologists considered more important for patients to understand their disease, treatment adverse effects, and consequences of noncompliance.

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.

Evaluating Discrete Choice Experiment Willingness to Pay [DCE-WTP] analysis, and Relative Social Willingness to Pay [RS-WTP] analysis in a Health Technology Assessment of a treatment for an ultra-rare childhood disease [CLN2]

BACKGROUND

: Conventional cost-effectiveness analysis [CEA] using cost per QALY thresholds may counteract other incentives introduced to foster development of treatments for rare and ultra-rare diseases. Therefore, alternative economic evaluation methods were explored, namely Discrete Choice Experiment Willingness to Pay (DCE-WTP) and Relative Social Willingness to Pay (RS-WTP), to value interventions for an ultra-rare childhood disease, Neuronal Ceroid Lipofuscinosis type 2 (CLN2).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Treatment for CLN2 was valued from a citizen's ("social") perspective using DCE-WTP and RS-WTP in a survey of 4,009 United Kingdom [UK] adults. Three attributes (initial quality of life, treatment effect, and life expectancy) were used in both analyses. For DCE-WTP a cost attribute (marginal income tax increase) was also included. Optimal econometric models were identified.

RESULTS

DCE-WTP indicated that UK adults are willing to pay incremental increases through taxation for improvements in CLN2 attributes. RS-WTP identified a willingness to allocate >40% of a pre-assigned healthcare budget to prevent child mortality and approximately 15% for improved health status.

CONCLUSIONS

Both techniques illustrated substantive social WTP for CLN2 interventions, despite the small number of children benefitting. This highlights a gap between UK citizens' willingness to spend on rare disease interventions and current funding policies.

Reporting violations of European Charter of Patients' Rights: analysis of patient complaints in Croatia

Background

The European Charter of Patients' Rights (ECPR) presents basic patients' rights in health care. We analysed the characteristics of patients' complaints about their rights submitted through the official complaints system and to a non-governmental organization in Croatia.

Methods

The official system for patients’complaints in Croatia does not have a common pathway but offers different modes for addressing patient complaints. In this cross-sectional study, we analysed the reports about patients’ complaints from the official regional committees sent to the Ministry of Health. We also analysed the complaints received by the Croatian Association for the Protection of Patient’s Rights (CAPR) and mapped them to the ECPR.

Results

The aggregated official data from the Ministry of Health in 2017 and 2018 covered only 289 individual complaints from 10 out of 21 counties. Complaints were most frequently related to secondary and tertiary healthcare institutions and details were not provided. CAPR received a total of 440 letters, out of which 207 contained 301 complaints about violations of patients’ rights in 2017–2018. The most common complaint was the Right of Access to health care (35.3%) from the ECPR, followed by the Right to Information (29.9%) and the Right to Safety (21.7%). The fewest complaints were about the Right to Complain (1.9%), Right to Innovation (1.4%), Right to Compensation (1.4%), and Right to Preventive Measures (1.0%).

Conclusions

Reporting and dealing with patients’ complaints about violations of their patients’ rights does not appear to be effective in a system with parallel but uncoordinated complaints pathways. Mapping patient's complaints to the ECPR is a useful tool to assess the perception of patients’ rights and to plan actions to improve the complaints system for effective health care.

Understanding Attributes that Influence Physician and Caregiver Decisions About Neurotechnology for Pediatric Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: A Formative Qualitative Study to Support the Development of a Discrete Choice Experiment

OBJECTIVE

This study reports formative qualitative research used to analyze decision making regarding neurotechnological interventions for pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy from the perspective of physicians and caregivers and the derivation of attributes for a discrete choice experiment.

METHODS

Purposive and convenience sampling was used to recruit physicians and caregivers. Physician focus group sessions were held at key national conferences in the USA and Canada. Caregivers were approached through clinics with established epilepsy surgery programs in the USA and Canada. Thematic analysis was used to identify critical features of decisions about treatment outcomes, procedural trade-offs, values, and concerns surrounding conventional and novel pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy interventions among physicians and caregivers.

RESULTS

The results highlight the presence of central attributes that are considered by both groups in decision making, such as "chances of seizure freedom", "risk", "availability of evidence", and "cost to families", as well as attributes that reflect important differences between groups. Physicians were focused on the specifics of treatment options, while caregivers thought more holistically, considering the overall well-being of their children.

DISCUSSION

The findings shaped the development of a discrete choice experiment to understand the likely uptake of different neurotechnologies. We identified differences in decision making and thus designed two discrete choice experiments to elicit preferences for pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy treatments, one aimed at clinicians and one at caregivers. The variation we observed highlights the value of seeking to understand the influences at the point of clinical decision making and incorporating this information into care.

Preliminary testing of a patient decision aid for patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Background

Multiple first-line disease modifying therapies (DMTs) are available for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), each with different characteristics. We developed an interactive patient decision aid (PtDA) to promote informed shared decision-making (SDM).

Objective

To test the preliminary effectiveness of the PtDA in participants with RRMS.

Methods

Knowledge, and decisional conflict were measured pre- and post- implementation of the PtDA, SDM after the consultation, and 6-month treatment patterns were observed. Differences in scores were analyzed using descriptive statistics and paired t-tests. Qualitative interviews with patients and neurologists were analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results

52 participants were recruited: most were female (81%), 40 years of age or younger (62%), and had experienced MS for less than 5 years (56%). After participants used the PtDA, there was a significant improvement in decisional conflict (change = 1.00; p < 0.001) and knowledge (change = 2.15, p < 0.001). Nearly all patients wanted SDM, and 25 (56%) reported this occurred in their consult. Qualitative results suggested the PtDA supported both patients and neurologists in making decisions.

Conclusion

This pilot study suggests that PtDA use helps RRMS patients and their clinician select a DMT. Future studies will assess the feasibility of implementation and the impact of the PtDA on timely DMT initiation and longer-term adherence.

Is two a crowd? A qualitative analysis of dyad learning in an OBGYN clinical clerkship

INTRODUCTION

Dyad learning occurs when two students work together to acquire new skills and knowledge. Several studies have provided evidence to support the educational rationale for dyad learning in the controlled simulated setting. However, the role of dyad learning in the clinical setting remains uncertain. Unlike the simulated setting, learning in the clinical setting depends on a complex interplay between medical students, doctors, nurses and patients potentially making dyad learning less valuable in clerkships. The objective of this study was to explore how key stakeholders perceive the value of implementing dyad learning during medical students' clinical clerkships.

METHODS

In a constructivist qualitative study, we conducted 51 semi-structured interviews with 36 key stakeholders involved in dyad learning, including 10 medical students, 12 doctors, five nurses and nine patients. Data were coded inductively using thematic analysis, then coded deductively using stakeholder theory as a theoretical framework.

RESULTS

We found that stakeholders generally perceived the educational impact of dyad learning in the clinical setting similarly but disagreed on its value. Students emphasised that dyad learning made them participate more actively during patient encounters and patients did not mind having two students present. Doctors and nurses considered dyad learning disruptive to the balance between service and training and reported that it did not resonate with their perception of good patient care.

CONCLUSION

Dyad learning enables students to be more active during their clinical clerkships, but it easily disrupts the balance between service and training. This disruption may be exacerbated by the shifted balance in priorities and values between different stakeholder groups, as well as by making implicit teaching obligations more explicit for supervising doctors and nurses. Consequently, implementing dyad learning may not be perceived as valuable by doctors and nurses in the clinical setting, regardless of its pedagogical rationale.

Strategies for the Management of Solitary Pulmonary Nodules. A Survey of Patient Preferences

BACKGROUND

Guideline-based strategies for evaluation of solitary pulmonary nodules are tailored to the likelihood of malignancy. Surveillance, biopsy or resection are all reasonable approaches in fit individuals when the likelihood of malignancy is intermediate. Given the paucity of data demonstrating superior outcomes and important trade-offs between strategies, guidelines emphasize the importance of eliciting patient preferences and engaging in shared decision-making, however there is little literature on what patient preferences actually are.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional, interview-administered questionnaire in 100 adults recruited from a metropolitan teaching hospital, using a hypothetical scenario designed to elicit patient preferences for different management strategies of solitary pulmonary nodules with probability of malignancy between 10% and 70%.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 62 years (range 45 to 80), 56% were male, 94% were current or ex-smokers. Ninety-four percent completed all questions. At 10% probability of malignancy, 36.3% preferred surveillance, 42.4% preferred needle biopsy and 21.2% preferred surgical resection. Preference for surgical resection increased to 53.5% and 86.2% when the probability of malignancy was 30% and 70% respectively. Changes in the diagnostic yield of CT biopsy significantly altered preferences when probability of malignancy was 10% or 30%.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of participants surveyed expressed a preference for some type of biopsy over observation at all levels of solitary pulmonary nodule probability of malignancy evaluated. In an era of increasing solitary pulmonary nodule detection and patient-centered care, if confirmed in broader studies, these findings have considerable implications for processes of care and resource allocation.