Preferences for treatments to prevent rheumatoid arthritis in Canada and the influence of shared decision-making.

Biologics DMARDs Discrete choice experiment Health policy Patient preferences Prevention Rheumatoid arthritis

Journal

Clinical rheumatology
ISSN: 1434-9949
Titre abrégé: Clin Rheumatol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8211469

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Oct 2020
Historique:
received: 11 03 2020
accepted: 23 03 2020
revised: 11 03 2020
pubmed: 6 4 2020
medline: 15 5 2021
entrez: 6 4 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To elicit and compare preferences of patients and first-degree relatives and rheumatologists for preventive treatments for rheumatoid arthritis, understand the influence of shared decision-making, and predict the probability of uptake of the preventive treatments currently being studied. An online discrete choice experiment was completed by patients and their first-degree relatives and rheumatologists. Results were analysed using mixed logit model to estimate preferences for the key features of treatments. Preferences for features of treatments were used to predict the probability of uptake of seven preventive treatment options. A total of 108 potential recipients (78 patients and 30 of their first-degree relatives) and 39 rheumatologists completed the survey. Preferences of patients/first-degree relatives and rheumatologists were similar (shared decision-making was most important, followed by the risk of side effects and potential benefit), but subtle differences existed; rheumatologists placed greater importance on certainty in evidence than patients/first-degree relatives, who felt that how a treatment was taken was more important. Predicted uptake suggested that 38% (95% CI 19%, 58%) of patients/first-degree relatives would not take a preventive treatment, compared with 12% (95% CI - 4%, 27%) of rheumatologists. A consistent finding across all groups was a preference for non-biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. Only relatively safe options for preventive treatment are likely to be acceptable to at-risk populations. This study of preventive treatments highlights that the preferences of physicians and recipients of treatment should take a central role in the design of clinical studies as well as in decisions to initiate treatments. Key Points • This paper is the first to compare preferences for preventive treatments between rheumatologists and patients and at-risk individuals. • The results of this study indicate that patients and at-risk individuals, as well as rheumatologists, are likely to prefer the safest options as preventive treatment, even if the potential benefit of these is lower. • Although preferences of patients and at-risk individuals are similar to those of rheumatologists, the choice of preventive treatment may differ between groups; this is important as shared decision-making was a critical factor in treatment decision-making. • Preferences of physicians and recipients of treatment should take a central role in the design of clinical studies as well as in decisions to initiate treatments.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32248434
doi: 10.1007/s10067-020-05072-w
pii: 10.1007/s10067-020-05072-w
doi:

Substances chimiques

Antirheumatic Agents 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

2931-2941

Subventions

Organisme : Canadian Initiative for Outcomes in Rheumatology Care
ID : 2015
Organisme : The Arthritis Society
ID : YIS-16-104
Organisme : Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research
ID : 16813

Auteurs

Mark Harrison (M)

Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. mark.harrison@ubc.ca.
Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences (CHEOS), St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, Canada. mark.harrison@ubc.ca.
Arthritis Research Canada, Richmond, Canada. mark.harrison@ubc.ca.

Nick Bansback (N)

Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences (CHEOS), St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, Canada.
Arthritis Research Canada, Richmond, Canada.
School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Magda Aguiar (M)

Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Cheryl Koehn (C)

Arthritis Consumer Experts/JointHealth, Vancouver, Canada.

Kam Shojania (K)

Arthritis Research Canada, Richmond, Canada.
Division of Rheumatology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Axel Finckh (A)

Division of Rheumatology, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Marie Hudson (M)

Division of Rheumatology, and Department of Medicine, Jewish General Hospital and Lady Davis Institute, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH