Dataset Information

Patient perspectives on antipsychotic treatments and their association with clinical outcomes.

ABSTRACT: This analysis examined patient-reported attitudes toward antipsychotic medication and the relationship of these attitudes with clinical outcomes and pharmacotherapy adherence. The analysis included three randomized, double-blind studies in patients with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or schizophreniform disorder diagnosed according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th Edition and randomly assigned to treatment with olanzapine 5-20 mg/day or another antipsychotic (haloperidol 2-20 mg/day, risperidone 2-10 mg/day, or ziprasidone 80-160 mg/day). Patient-reported improvements were significantly greater for olanzapine (n = 488) versus other treatments (haloperidol n = 145, risperidone n = 158, or ziprasidone n = 271) on multiple Drug Attitude Inventory items. A positive attitude toward medication reported by patients was significantly associated with greater clinical improvement on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and lower discontinuation rates. These results suggest that patients' perceptions of treatment benefits are associated with objective clinical measures, including reduction of symptom severity and lower discontinuation rates. Furthermore, olanzapine may be associated with more positive treatment attitudes. These findings may contribute to a better understanding of reasons for treatment adherence from patients' own perspectives.

SUBMITTER: Liu-Seifert H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2962402 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient perspectives on antipsychotic treatments and their association with clinical outcomes.

Liu-Seifert Hong H Osuntokun Olawale O OO Godfrey Jenna L JL Feldman Peter D PD

Patient preference and adherence 20101005

This analysis examined patient-reported attitudes toward antipsychotic medication and the relationship of these attitudes with clinical outcomes and pharmacotherapy adherence. The analysis included three randomized, double-blind studies in patients with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or schizophreniform disorder diagnosed according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th Edition and randomly assigned to treatment with olanzapine 5-20 mg/day or another antipsych ...[more]

PMID: 21049089

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectiveNew treatments for haemophilia are under development or entering the market, including extended half-life products, designer drugs and gene therapy, thereby increasing treatment options for haemophilia. It is currently unknown how people with haemophilia decide whether to switch to a new treatment. Therefore, the objective of this study was to explore what factors may play a role when Dutch patients and parents of boys with moderate or severe haemophilia make decisions about whether to switch to a different treatment, and how disease and treatment characteristics may affect these decisions. This may aid clinical teams in tailored information provision and shared decision making.MethodsWe conducted interviews among adults with moderately severe or severe haemophilia and parents of young boys with severe haemophilia. We aimed to include participants from a variety of backgrounds in terms of involvement in the haemophilia community, age, treatment centre and treatments. Participants were recruited through the Netherlands Haemophilia Society and a haemophilia treatment centre. Semi-structured interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic content analysis was used to analyse the data.ResultsTwelve people with haemophilia and two mothers of boys with haemophilia were included. In general, participants reported to be satisfied with their current treatment. However, they considered ease of use of the medication (fewer injections, easier handling, alternative administration) an added value of new treatments. Participants were aware of the high cost of coagulation factor products and some expressed their concern about the Netherlands Haemophilia Society's long-term willingness to pay for current and novel treatments, especially for increased usage due to high-risk activities. Participants also expressed their concerns about the short- and long-term safety of new treatments and believed the effects of gene therapy were not yet fully understood. Participants expected their treatment team to inform them when a particular new treatment would be suitable for them.ConclusionsWith the number of treatment options set to increase, it is important for healthcare providers to be aware of how patient experiences shape patients' decisions about new therapies.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Oral antipsychotic (AP) medications are frequently prescribed to people with bipolar I disorder (BD-I). A cross-sectional online survey examined the experiences of people living with BD-I with a history of recent AP use. METHODS:Adults with self-reported physician-diagnosed BD-I (N =?200) who received oral APs during the prior year completed a survey on AP-related experiences, including side effects and their perceived burden on social functioning, adherence, and work. Items also assessed preferences for trade-offs (balancing symptom management and side effects) when considering a hypothetical new AP. The perceived impact of specific, prevalent side effects on adherence, work, and preferences for a hypothetical AP were also examined. Analyses were descriptive. RESULTS:The survey sample had a mean age of 43.2 (SD?=?12.4) years, was 60% female, and 31% nonwhite. Almost all participants (98%) had experienced AP side effects. Common self-reported side effects were feeling drowsy or tired (83%), lack of emotion (79%), anxiety (79%), dry mouth (76%), and weight gain (76%). Weight gain was cited as the most bothersome side effect, rated by most participants (68%) as "very" or "extremely bothersome." Nearly half of participants (49%) reported that AP side effects negatively impacted their job performance; almost all (92%) reported that side effects - most commonly anxiety and lack of emotion - negatively impacted social relationships (e.g., family or romantic partners). The most commonly-reported reason for stopping AP use was dislike of side effects (48%). Side effects most likely to lead to stopping or taking less of AP treatment included "feeling like a 'zombie'" (29%), feeling drowsy or tired (25%), and weight gain (24%). When considering a hypothetical new AP, the most common side effects participants wanted to avoid included AP-induced anxiety (50%), weight gain (48%), and "feeling like a 'zombie'" (47%). CONCLUSIONS:Side effects of APs were both common and bothersome, and impacted social functioning, adherence, and work. Findings highlight the prevailing unmet need for new APs with more favorable benefit-risk profiles.

Project description:BackgroundPatients diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) are confronted with a difficult decision regarding whether to undergo definitive treatment or to pursue an active surveillance protocol. This is potentially further complicated by the possibility that patients and physicians may place different value on factors that influence this decision. We conducted a qualitative investigation to better understand patient and physician perceptions of factors influencing treatment decisions for low-risk PCa.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted among 43 racially and ethnically diverse patients diagnosed with low-risk PCa, who were identified through a population-based cancer registry, and 15 physicians who were selected to represent a variety of practice settings in the Greater San Francisco Bay Area.ResultsPatients and physicians both described several key individual (e.g., clinical) and interpersonal (e.g., healthcare communications) factors as important for treatment decision-making. Overall, physicians' perceptions largely mirrored patients' perceptions. First, we observed differences in treatment preferences by age and stage of life. At older ages, there was a preference for less invasive options. However, at younger ages, we found varying opinions among both patients and physicians. Second, patients and physicians both described concerns about side effects including physical functioning and non-physical considerations. Third, we observed differences in expectations and the level of difficulty for clinical conversations based on information needs and resources between patients and physicians. Finally, we discovered that patients and physicians perceived patients' prior knowledge and the support of family/friends as facilitators of clinical conversations.ConclusionsOur study suggests that the gap between patient and physician perceptions on the influence of clinical and communication factors on treatment decision-making is not large. The consensus we observed points to the importance of developing relevant clinical communication roadmaps as well as high quality and accessible patient education materials.

Project description:BackgroundMucopolysaccharidosis II (MPS II) is a rare lysosomal storage disease characterized by iduronate-2-sulfatase gene (IDS) deficiency and downstream glycosaminoglycan accumulation. Two-thirds of patients present with neuronopathic disease and evaluating cognitive function in these patients is challenging owing to limitations of currently available tests. During the clinical development of intrathecal idursulfase (idursulfase-IT), regulatory authorities requested qualitative data to further understand the neurocognitive changes observed by the investigators through the clinical trials.ResultsThis qualitative study consisted of semi-structured interviews with all nine of the principal investigators who participated in the idursulfase-IT phase 2/3 (NCT02055118) and extension (NCT02412787) trials. These investigators enrolled the 56 patients with neuronopathic MPS II who qualified for the extension phase of the trial. The investigators were asked to rate the disease status of their patients. Of the 56 patients, 49 (88%) were rated as having disease that was improved/improving, stabilized or slowing progression compared with the expected outcomes with no treatment. Three patients were rated as worsening, while the remaining four patients were considered to have slowing progression or worsening disease. Similar results were demonstrated for patients aged from 3 to under 6 years at baseline, with 33 of 39 patients (85%) rated as having disease that was improved/improving, stabilized or slowing progression. Of the seven patients rated with slowing progression/worsening or worsening disease, five of them had an IDS variant other than missense, while two had a missense class variant. All the assigned improved/improving ratings were in patients receiving idursulfase-IT from the start of the phase 2/3 trial. Moreover, patients under 3 years of age at baseline were all rated as either improved/improving or stabilized disease. In a blinded review of patient profiles, investigators were requested to assign a disease status rating to 18 patients with large IDS deletions; 67% of these patients were rated as improved/improving or stabilized disease.ConclusionsThis qualitative analysis provides a snapshot of clinicians' considerations when evaluating treatment in patients with neuronopathic MPS II, compared with the expected decline in cognitive function in the absence of treatment. The results highlight the importance of robust assessment tools in treatment evaluation.

Project description:BackgroundDigital patient reported outcomes are used increasingly in daily care and treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Their purpose includes increased focus on patient wellbeing, reduction in avoidable follow-up consultations and increased patient self-management. However, implementation issues occur and studies indicate patients may have concerns, particularly regarding having fewer face-to-face consultations. This study aims to explore patients' perspectives of use and non-use of digital patient reported outcomes and to understand the mechanisms underpinning patient reluctance to engage with this health technology.ResultsSixteen patients with inflammatory bowel disease at a regional hospital in Denmark were interviewed about their experiences of, and perspectives on, digital patient reported outcomes. A certain level of eHealth literacy was found to be a fundamental condition for use, while other factors were barriers or facilitators for use of digital PROs. Patients' main concerns were about potential consequences for their care and relationship with the clinic. Most patients in stable remission were satisfied with the hospital being a "life-line" if their symptoms worsened, and perceived digital patient reported outcomes to be an efficient tool to establish that "life-line". Patients with severe symptoms and a high degree of emotional distress related to their disease valued the potential for digital patient reported outcomes to increase their clinicians' focus on mental health and extra-intestinal symptoms.ConclusionThis study found that if patients had sufficient digital literacy, they perceived digital patient reported outcomes to be a useful replacement for face-to-face consultations. However, they were concerned about digital patient reported outcomes' effect on the patient-clinician relationship and its ability to detect worsening of symptoms. These concerns may be mitigated by good patient-clinician relationships, and the option for patients to maintain direct telephone contact with their gastroenterology specialist.

Dataset Information

Patient perspectives on antipsychotic treatments and their association with clinical outcomes.

Publications

Patient perspectives on antipsychotic treatments and their association with clinical outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets