Doctors' understanding of individualisation of drug treatments: a qualitative interview study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To explore doctors' understanding of individualisation of drug treatments, and identify the methods used to achieve individualisation.Design
In this exploratory study, we used in-depth qualitative interviews with doctors to gain insight into their understanding of the term 'individualised treatments' and the methods that they use to achieve it.Participants
16 general practitioners in 6 rural and 10 urban practices, 2 geriatricians and 2 clinical academics were recruited.Setting
Primary and secondary care in South West of England.Results
Understanding of individualisation varied between doctors, and their initial descriptions of individualisation were not always consistent with subsequent examples of the patients they had treated. Understandings of, and methods used to achieve, individualised treatment were frequently discussed in relation to making drug treatment decisions. Few doctors spoke of using strategies to support patients to individualise their own treatments after the consultation.Conclusions
Despite its widespread use, variation in doctors' understanding of the term individualisation highlights the need for it to be defined. Efforts are needed to develop effective methods that would offer a structured approach to support patients to manage their treatments after consultations.
SUBMITTER: Denford S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3657639 | biostudies-literature | 2013 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Doctors' understanding of individualisation of drug treatments: a qualitative interview study.
Denford S S Frost J J Dieppe P P Britten N N
BMJ open 20130528 5
<h4>Objective</h4>To explore doctors' understanding of individualisation of drug treatments, and identify the methods used to achieve individualisation.<h4>Design</h4>In this exploratory study, we used in-depth qualitative interviews with doctors to gain insight into their understanding of the term 'individualised treatments' and the methods that they use to achieve it.<h4>Participants</h4>16 general practitioners in 6 rural and 10 urban practices, 2 geriatricians and 2 clinical academics were r ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivesTo understand how doctors reflect on when and why they seek help from an organised peer-support service.DesignData were collected through audiotaped, qualitative, semi-structured interviews. The interviews were analysed with systematic text condensation.SettingA peer-support service accessible to all doctors in Norway.ParticipantsThirteen doctors were interviewed after attending a counselling service in fall 2018. They were selected to represent variation in gender, demographics, and medical specialty. Doctors were excluded if the interview could not be held within 10 days after they had accessed peer support.ResultsThe doctors' perspectives and experiences of when and why they seek support and their expectations of the help they would receive are presented, and barriers to and facilitators of seeking support are discussed. Three categories of help-seeking behaviour were identified: (1) 'Concerned-looking for advice' describing help seeking in a strenuous situation with need for guidance; (2) 'Fear of not coping any longer' describing help seeking when struggling due to unreasonable stress and/or conflict in their lives; and (3) 'Looking for a way back or out' describing help seeking when out of work. Expectations to the help they would receive varied widely. Motivations for seeking help had more to do with factors enabling or restricting help-seeking than with the severity of symptoms.ConclusionsMany different situations lead doctors to seek peer support, and they have various expectations of the service as well as diverse needs, motivations and constraints to seeking peer support. Further research is warranted to investigate the impact of peer support and how to tailor the service to best suit doctors' specific needs.
| S-EPMC8532555 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesPatients and policy makers advocate that drug treatments should be individualised. However, the term is used in a variety of ways. We set out to identify the range of related terminology and concepts in the general field of individualisation, map out the relationships between these concepts and explore how patients' perspectives are considered.DesignWe consulted members of an established patient and public involvement group about their experience of medicine taking for long-term conditions and their ideas about individualisation. We then conducted a scoping review of the literature to explore how terms surrounding individualisation of drug treatment are used and defined in the literature, and to explore the extent to which patients' perspectives are represented, with a view to informing future recommendations as to how individualisation can be operationalised.MethodsWe identified relevant literature using a range of search strategies. Two researchers independently extracted definitions of terms using a template. Inductive and deductive methods were used to explore the data.ResultsDefinitions were categorised according to the following themes: medical management; pharmacogenetics, the patient's perspective; interactions between the healthcare provider and patient and management of long-term conditions.ConclusionsWithin the literature reviewed, the involvement of patients in the ongoing management of drug treatment was largely absent. We propose the use of a new term 'mutually agreed tailoring' (MAT). This describes the ongoing pharmacological management of conditions that incorporates patients' specific needs, experiences and existing strategies for using their medications, and the professionals' clinical judgement. This usually includes patients monitoring their symptoms and, with the support of the professional, making appropriate product, dose or timing adjustments as necessary. Our previous work suggests that many patients and doctors are successfully practising MAT, so we suggest that a formal description may facilitate wider utilisation of strategies that will improve patient outcomes.
| S-EPMC3975745 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGuidelines and evidence-based drug treatment recommendations are usually based on the results of clinical trials, which have limited generalisability in routine clinical settings due to their restrictive eligibility criteria. These trials are also conducted in ideal and rigorously controlled settings. N of 1 trials, which are single patient multiple crossover studies, offer a means of increasing the evidence base and individualising care for individuals in clinical practice. This systematic review of the N of 1 drug treatment trial aims to investigate its usefulness for achieving optimal individualised patient care.MethodsThe following databases will be searched for relevant articles: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO (all via Ovid), AMED, CINAHAL (via EBSCO), The Cochrane Library (including CENTRAL, NHS EED, and DARE), and Web of Science (Thomson Reuters). Supplementary searches will include ongoing trial databases and organisational websites. All N of 1 trials in which patients have been treated with a drug will be considered. Outcomes will include information on the clinical usefulness of N of 1 trials-i.e. achievement of optimal individualised care, health-care utilisation of patients, frequently used practices, experiences of clinical care or participation in N of 1 trials, adherence to treatment plan, and unwanted effects of the treatment. Screening of included papers will be undertaken independently by two reviewers, while data extraction and the quality of reporting will be conducted by one reviewer and checked by another. Both quantitative and qualitative summaries will be reported using appropriate methods.DiscussionThis review will provide new insights into the clinical utility of N of 1 drug trials in helping participants find the most acceptable treatment as defined by patients and clinicians based on the selected outcome measures and the perspectives of participants involved in such trials. Findings from this review will inform the development of a stakeholder workshop and guidance to help physicians find the optimum therapy for their patients and will help guide future research on N of 1 trials.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016032452.
| S-EPMC5402671 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPatients living with biliary tract cancer (BTC) experience a decline in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aimed to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the patient experience of BTC-related signs/symptoms and the impacts of these on daily functioning and HRQoL.MethodsPatients with BTC participated in qualitative semi-structured concept elicitation interviews. Signs/symptoms and impacts of BTC were initially explored by targeted literature searches and interviews with five clinicians. Patient interviews were transcribed and coded using qualitative research software. Concept saturation was assessed over five interview waves. A sign/symptom or impact was defined as "salient" if mentioned by ≥ 50% of patients, with a mean disturbance rating of ≥ 5 (0-10 scale). A conceptual model of the patient experience of BTC-related signs/symptoms and impacts was produced.ResultsTwenty-three patients from the USA (78% women; median age: 54 years), diagnosed as having early (n = 3), locally advanced (n = 11) or metastatic (n = 9) disease, were interviewed. Sixty-six signs/symptoms and 12 impacts were identified. Of these, 46 signs/symptoms and 8 impacts were not identified from the targeted literature or clinician interviews. Concept saturation was reached by the fourth of five interview waves. Fourteen disease-related signs/symptoms (including fatigue/lack of energy, abdominal pain, lack of appetite, insomnia and diarrhoea) and three impacts (physical, emotional and cognitive impacts) were deemed "salient". The conceptual model included 50 signs/symptoms and 12 impacts.ConclusionPatients with BTC reported a range of signs/symptoms and impacts that negatively affect daily functioning and HRQoL.
| S-EPMC8594245 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to elucidate the patient experience of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) to guide patient-centered outcome measurement in drug development.MethodsPatients with HCC participated in qualitative interviews to elicit disease-related signs/symptoms and impacts, using discussion guides developed from literature searches and discussions with oncologists. Interview participants rated the disturbance of their experiences (0-10 scale). A conceptual model was developed and mapped against patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments identified from database reviews.ResultsInterviews were conducted with 25 individuals with HCC (68% were men; median age: 63 years; 12% Barcelona clinic liver cancer (BCLC) stage A; 32% stage B; and 56% stage C) in the USA. Fifty-one HCC-related concepts were identified from the interviews and were grouped into eight sign/symptom categories (eating behavior/weight changes; extremities [arms, legs]; fatigue and strength; gastrointestinal; pain; sensory; skin; other) and four impact categories (emotional; physical; cognitive function; other) for the conceptual model. The most prevalent and disturbing experiences across the disease stages were fatigue/lack of energy and emotional impacts such as frustration, fear, and depression. Abdominal pain and skin-related issues were particularly common and disturbing in individuals with HCC stage C. The EORTC QLQ-C30 and HCC18 were identified as commonly used PRO instruments in HCC studies and captured the relevant signs/symptoms associated with the patient experience.ConclusionPatients with HCC reported a range of signs/symptoms and impacts that negatively affect daily functioning and quality of life. Including PRO measures in HCC clinical trials can provide meaningful patient perspectives during drug development.
| S-EPMC8847294 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The 100,000 Genomes Project is a hybrid clinical and research project in which patients and parents are offered genome sequencing for cancer and rare and inherited disease diagnosis; all participants receive their main findings and contribute their data for research, and are offered optional secondary findings. Our aim was to explore participating parents' attitudes towards and understanding of genome sequencing in this hybrid context. We conducted in-depth telephone interviews with 20 parents of children with rare diseases participating in the 100,000 Genomes Project. Parents were positive about contributing to research, although some had needed reassurance about data protections. Although most felt positive about secondary findings, some could not recall or misunderstood key aspects. Some were also concerned about potential emotional impact of results and a few raised concerns about life insurance implications, and the impact of future legal changes. Participants were generally positive about consent appointments, but several raised concerns about 'information overload' because of deciding about secondary findings at the same time as about the main diagnostic genome sequencing and data contribution. Additional information resources, particularly online tools, were highlighted as potentially useful ways of supporting the consent process. We conclude that parents offered genome sequencing as part of a national hybrid clinical and research project report many positive attitudes and experiences, but also concerns and misunderstandings. Further research is needed on how best to support informed consent, particularly about secondary findings. Additional resources such as online tools might usefully support future genome sequencing consent processes.
| S-EPMC7316711 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNotalgia paresthetica (NP) is a chronic sensory neuropathy that causes intense pruritus, typically affecting the upper portion of the back and lasting for months to years. The impacts of pruritus and the full symptom experience are not well documented.ObjectiveTo describe patients' NP symptom experience and the impacts of living with NP-related itch.MethodsSemistructured, one-to-one qualitative telephone interviews were conducted in adults living with NP. The worst itch severity during the previous 24 hours was assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale.ResultsThirty participants (23 females; aged 41-80 years) completed interviews. Seventeen NP-related symptoms were described, with daily itch being the most common. Participants' itch ranged from severe to very severe (50%) and was experienced for a median of 2.8 years. Most (73%) participants were not receiving treatment for NP at the time of the study. Other reported symptoms included skin pain or sensitivity and secondary symptoms from itching (skin discoloration, lumps or bumps, bleeding or scabbing). NP-related itch was frequently reported to affect mood, interfere with sleep, and disrupt self-care.LimitationsOnly English-speaking participants living in the United States were included.ConclusionThis study highlights the patient experience of living with NP and findings reveal that there remains an unmet need for effective therapeutic options to address NP-related itch.
| S-EPMC9256643 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlveolar echinococcosis (AE) is a serious parasitic zoonotic disease that resembles malignancy with clinically silent infiltrative growth predominantly involving the liver. AE patients show high levels of comorbid psychological burden and fear of disease progression. This study aimed to examine AE patients' perspective on their disease-related psychosocial burden using qualitative methods.MethodsWe conducted N = 12 semi-structured interviews with AE patients focusing on their disease-related psychosocial burden, coping strategies, information seeking behavior, and subjective illness concepts. To this end, AE patients from a previous quantitative cross-sectional study were invited to participate. After verbatim transcription, interviews were analyzed thematically.ResultsAfter analysis, data was grouped into five main themes: A) Perceived disease-related burden, B) Coping with disease-related burden, C) Disease-related impact on their social environment, D) Facing the future with the disease, and E) Disease-related information seeking behavior and subjective illness concepts. All participants perceived AE as a severe disease with inextricably linked biological, psychological, and social effects. Key positive influences reported included the provision of information and access to informal and formal support, including the ability to lead active personal and professional lives for as long as possible. Self-directed, web-based information seeking often led to increased feelings of hopelessness and anxiety.ConclusionOur findings underscore the need to consider psychosocial morbidity in AE patient management. To reduce psychological burden, address disease-related apprehensions, and to prevent stigmatization, health professionals need to provide AE patients with comprehensive disease-related information to improve patient and social awareness.
| S-EPMC10403068 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAuthors of systematic reviews have difficulty obtaining unpublished data for their reviews. This project aimed to provide an in-depth description of the experiences of authors in searching for and gaining access to unpublished data for their systematic reviews, and to give guidance on best practices for identifying, obtaining and using unpublished data.MethodsThis is a qualitative study analyzing in-depth interviews with authors of systematic reviews who have published Cochrane reviews or published systematic reviews outside of The Cochrane Library. We included participants who 1) were the first or senior author of a published systematic review of a drug intervention, 2) had expertise in conducting systematic reviews, searching for data, and assessing methodological biases, and 3) were able to participate in an interview in English. We used non-random sampling techniques to identify potential participants. Eighteen Cochrane authors were contacted and 16 agreed to be interviewed (89% response rate). Twenty-four non-Cochrane authors were contacted and 16 were interviewed (67% response rate).ResultsRespondents had different understandings of what was meant by unpublished data, including specific outcomes and methodological details. Contacting study authors was the most common method used to obtain unpublished data and the value of regulatory agencies as a data source was underappreciated. Using the data obtained was time consuming and labor intensive. Respondents described the collaboration with other colleagues and/or students required to organize, manage and use the data in their reviews, generally developing and using templates, spreadsheets and computer programs for data extraction and analysis. Respondents had a shared belief that data should be accessible but some had concerns about sharing their own data. Respondents believed that obtaining unpublished data for reviews has important public health implications. There was widespread support for government intervention to ensure open access to trial data.ConclusionsRespondents uniformly agreed that the benefit of identifying unpublished data was worth the effort and was necessary to identify the true harms and benefits of drugs. Recent actions by government, such as increased availability of trial data from the European Medicines Agency, may make it easier to acquire critical drug trial data.
| S-EPMC3685609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To identify priority interventions for the prevention and reduction of work stress and burnout in hospital doctors through analysis of (1) doctors' experiences of work stress and burnout and (2) their preferences with respect to interventions. DESIGN:Qualitative design using semistructured interviews analysed with deductive thematic analysis. SETTING:Hospitals in Ireland. PARTICIPANTS:32 hospital doctors (16 practising consultants and 16 doctors in training) from a range of specialties, career stages, hospital types and locations. RESULTS:Practical, system-focused interventions were found to be most needed. Challenges with basic entitlements, that is, accessing statutory leave, knowing in advance when leave can be taken and being adequately covered when on leave were identified as requiring urgent attention. Other priority interventions identified were the integration of psychological support in the everyday working environment, time and training for clinical line managers to perform key management activities such as debriefing and education interventions which highlight work stress risks and care pathways, teach self-care and train doctors in how to support one another. CONCLUSIONS:Hospital doctors are feeling the effects of greater demand and fewer resources. What they most urgently need is adequate staffing levels, access to statutory leave and adequate cover when on leave. Doctors do not receive the support they need from their clinical line managers, who lack the skills and time to excel as people managers. Organisations should focus on developing clinical management skills across the system. The culture of medicine needs to change from stigmatisation and competitiveness to compassion and collaboration. Organisations, medical schools and professional bodies can steer this change through education.
| S-EPMC6731950 | biostudies-literature