Dataset Information

Patient perspective of measuring treatment efficacy: the rheumatoid arthritis patient priorities for pharmacologic interventions outcomes.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:Collaboration with patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) highlights that outcomes important to them include fatigue, coping, and life enjoyment. However, these are not commonly measured in clinical trials. There is little evidence about which outcomes patients would prioritize, or what factors influence patients' prioritization. Our objective was to develop a complementary core set with patients to promote inclusion of their priority outcomes in pharmacologic interventions. METHODS:Nominal groups were conducted with RA patients to rank 63 outcomes generated from previous in-depth interviews. A multicenter postal survey provided the final selection of core outcomes for the Rheumatoid Arthritis Patient Priorities for Pharmacologic Interventions (RAPP-PI), in which RA patients rated the importance of the priority outcomes from the nominal groups and ranked the top 6. RESULTS:Twenty-six patients participated in 5 nominal group discussions and reduced the 63 initial outcomes to the 32 most important. A total of 254 participants in the survey ranked priority treatment outcomes to form the RAPP-PI: pain, activities of daily living, joint damage, mobility, life enjoyment, independence, fatigue, and valued activities. The 8 priorities represent 3 domains of treatment outcomes: direct impact of RA, psychosocial well-being, and function/participation. Chi-square tests showed that disease severity, disease duration, sex, and patients' perceptions of managing, self-efficacy, and normality influenced the selection of priority treatment outcomes. CONCLUSION:Collaboration with patients has captured their perspectives of priority outcomes from pharmacologic interventions. Although there is some overlap with professional core outcomes, the additional use of this complementary set will give a broader evaluation of effectiveness of interventions from the key stakeholders: patients.

SUBMITTER: Sanderson T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2886964 | biostudies-literature | 2010 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient perspective of measuring treatment efficacy: the rheumatoid arthritis patient priorities for pharmacologic interventions outcomes.

Sanderson T T Morris M M Calnan M M Richards P P Hewlett S S

Arthritis care & research 20100501 5

<h4>Objective</h4>Collaboration with patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) highlights that outcomes important to them include fatigue, coping, and life enjoyment. However, these are not commonly measured in clinical trials. There is little evidence about which outcomes patients would prioritize, or what factors influence patients' prioritization. Our objective was to develop a complementary core set with patients to promote inclusion of their priority outcomes in pharmacologic interventions.<h ...[more]

PMID: 20461786

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSelf-efficacy, or patients' confidence in their ability to control disease and its consequences, was recently prioritised in EULAR recommendations for inflammatory arthritis self-management strategies. However, it remains unclear which factors influence self-efficacy in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsData were analysed from the 2-year RCT Care in early RA (CareRA), which studied remission-induction treatment regimens for early RA. Participants completed the Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale (ASES), Short-Form 36 (SF-36), Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R), Utrecht Coping List (UCL), RAQoL and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). Depending on time to first remission (DAS28-CRP < 2.6) and persistence of remission, treatment response was defined as persistent response, secondary failure, delayed response, late response or non-response. The association between ASES scores and clinical/psychosocial factors was explored with Spearman correlation and multivariate linear mixed models. Baseline predictors of week 104 ASES were identified with exploratory linear regression followed by multiple regression of significant predictors adjusted for DAS28-CRP, HAQ, treatment arm, treatment response, cumulative CRP/SJC28 and demographic/serologic confounders.ResultsAll 379 patients had a recent diagnosis of RA and were DMARD-naïve at study initiation. Most patients were women (69%) and RF/ACPA-positive (66%), and the mean (SD) age was 52 (13) years. For all tested outcome measures, better perceived health correlated with higher self-efficacy. While patient-reported factors (HAQ, SF-36, RAQoL, IPQ-R, pain, fatigue and patient's global assessment) showed moderate/strong correlations with ASES scores, correlations with physician-reported factors (physician's global assessment, SJC28), TJC28 and DAS28-CRP were weak. Only more favourable outcomes on patient-reported factors and DAS28-CRP were associated with higher ASES scores at each time point. An earlier, persistent treatment response predicted higher ASES scores at both weeks 52 and 104. Significant baseline predictors of week 104 ASES included HAQ; SF-36 mental component score, vitality, mental health and role emotional; IPQ-R illness coherence, treatment control, emotional representations and consequences; UCL Passive reacting; and the RAQoL.ConclusionsPatient-reported outcomes and treatment response were early determinants of long-term self-efficacy in an early RA trial. These results provide further relevance for the window of opportunity in an early treat-to-target strategy and could help to timely identify patients who might benefit from self-management interventions.Trial registrationEudraCT 2008-007225-39.

Project description:IntroductionRheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that causes a considerable burden for the patient and society. It is not clear yet whether aiming for remission (REM) is worthwhile, especially when compared with low disease activity (LDA).MethodsIn 356 consecutive RA patients, we obtained data on physical function (health assessment questionnaire (HAQ)), health-related quality of life (HRQoL: Short Form 36 (SF36), Short Form 6 dimensions (SF-6D), Euro QoL 5D (EQ-5D)), work productivity (work productivity and activity impairment questionnaire (WPAI)), as well as estimation of direct and indirect costs. Cross-sectionally, data were compared in patients within different levels of disease activity according to the simplified disease activity index (SDAI; remission (REM ≤3.3); n = 87; low disease activity (LDA: 3.3 < SDAI ≤11); n = 103; moderate to high disease activity (MDA/HDA) >11 n = 119) by using analyses of variance (ANOVA). Longitudinal investigations assessed patients who changed from LDA to REM and vice versa.ResultsWe found differences in patients achieving REM compared with LDA for HAQ (0.39 ± 0.58 versus 0.72 ± 68), WPAI (percentage impairment while working 11.8% ± 18.7% versus 26.8% ± 23.9%; percentage of overall activity impairment, 10.8% ± 14.1% versus 29.0% ± 23.6%)), EQ-5D (0.89 ± 0.12 versus 0.78 ± 0.6) and SF-36 (physical component score (PCS): 46.0 ± 8.6 versus 38.3 ± 10.5; mental component score (MCS): 49.9 ± 11.1 versus 47.9 ± 12.3) (P < 0.01 for all, except for SF36 MCS). Regarding costs, we found significant differences of direct and indirect costs (P < 0.05) within different levels of disease activity, with higher costs in patients with higher states of disease activity. Longitudinal evaluations confirmed the main analyses.ConclusionPatients with REM show better function, HRQoL, and productivity, even when compared with another good state, such as LDA. Also from a cost perspective, REM appears superior to all other states.

Project description:BackgroundMobile devices such as smartphones and tablets have surged in popularity in recent years, generating numerous possibilities for their use in health care as mobile health (mHealth) tools. One advantage of mHealth is that it can be provided asynchronously, signifying that health care providers and patients are not communicating in real time. The integration of asynchronous mHealth into daily clinical practice might therefore help to make health care more efficient for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The benefits have been reviewed in various medical conditions, such as diabetes and asthma, with promising results. However, to date, it is unclear what evidence exists for the use of asynchronous mHealth in the field of RA.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to map the different asynchronous mHealth interventions tested in clinical trials in patients with RA and to summarize the effects of the interventions.MethodsA systematic search of Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane, and PsycINFO was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were initially screened and later assessed by two independent researchers. Disagreements on inclusion or exclusion of studies were resolved by discussion.ResultsThe literature search yielded 1752 abstracts. After deduplication and screening, 10 controlled intervention studies were included. All studies were assessed to be at risk for bias in at least one domain of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. In the 10 selected studies, 4 different types of mHealth interventions were used: SMS reminders (to increase medication adherence or physical activity; n=3), web apps (for disease monitoring and/or to provide medical information; n=5), smartphone apps (for disease monitoring; n=1), and pedometers (to increase and track steps; n=1). Measured outcomes varied widely between studies; improvements were seen in terms of medication compliance (SMS reminders), reaching rapid remission (web app), various domains of physical activity (pedometer, SMS reminders, and web apps), patient-physician interaction (web apps), and self-efficacy (smartphone app).ConclusionsSMS reminders, web apps, smartphone apps, and pedometers have been evaluated in intervention studies in patients with RA. These interventions have been used to monitor patients or to support them in their health behavior. The use of asynchronous mHealth led to desirable outcomes in nearly all studies. However, since all studies were at risk of bias and methods used were very heterogeneous, high-quality research is warranted to corroborate these promising results.

Dataset Information

Patient perspective of measuring treatment efficacy: the rheumatoid arthritis patient priorities for pharmacologic interventions outcomes.

Publications

Patient perspective of measuring treatment efficacy: the rheumatoid arthritis patient priorities for pharmacologic interventions outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets