Patient Stakeholder Versus Physician Preferences Regarding Amyloid PET Testing.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Armstrong MJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6710130 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul-Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Patient Stakeholder Versus Physician Preferences Regarding Amyloid PET Testing.
Armstrong Melissa J MJ Gronseth Gary S GS Day Gregory S GS Rheaume Carol C Alliance Slande S Mullins C D CD
Alzheimer disease and associated disorders 20190701 3
<h4>Background</h4>Patient and caregiver perspectives on amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) use are largely unexplored, particularly as compared with clinician views.<h4>Methods</h4>We surveyed clinicians, patients, caregivers, and dementia advocates on topics relating to an evidence-based guideline on amyloid PET use. Topic importance was rated on a 9-point scale. Patient stakeholder and clinician views were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test.<h4>Results</h4>Patient representatives ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Prior studies suggest that a decreased cardiac catheterization rate for women with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is partially attributed to gender differences in patient preferences for testing. The hypothesis was that these preferences are influenced by physician recommendations for cardiovascular testing. METHODS:This was a cohort study of patients who presented to an emergency department (ED) with chest pain. At the time of ED disposition, patients were surveyed to assess whether or not the doctor discussed the possibility of coronary artery disease (CAD), the physician's recommendations for diagnostic testing, and the patient's preferences for further testing. The survey was repeated at the time of discharge from the hospital if the patient was admitted and again at 30 days for all patients. The main outcome was patient-reported physician recommendation for testing, and the secondary outcome was patient preference for cardiovascular testing. RESULTS:There were 206 patients enrolled (118 women, 88 men). Women were less likely than men to receive cardiac catheterization as inpatients (9.8% vs. 20.0%, p = 0.04). In the ED, women were less likely to be recommended for stress testing (8.5% vs. 19.3%, p = 0.02) or cardiac catheterization (4.2% vs. 13.6%, p = 0.02) or to see a cardiologist (8.5% vs. 22.7%, p < 0.01). As inpatients, women were more likely to be told that no further testing was needed (70.5% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.03). While there was higher incidence of prior CAD and myocardial infarction among the men in the study, analysis after removal of these patients did not alter results. Physicians were less likely to counsel women about diagnostic testing options in the ED (10.1% vs. 22.7%, p = 0.03), as inpatients (11.5% vs. 40.0%, p < 0.01), and as outpatients (26.1% vs. 48.6%, p = 0.04). No patients in the study refused their doctors' recommendations. Women were less likely to prefer catheterization in the ED (5.1% vs. 15.9%, p = 0.01) and were more likely to prefer no further testing as inpatients (60.7% vs. 40.0%, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS:Women who presented to the ED with symptoms concerning for ACS reported lower rates of physician recommendation for cardiovascular testing, as well as lower rates of counseling regarding cardiac etiologies of their chest pain. These findings suggest sex differences in preference for cardiovascular testing may be partially explained by the discussions between women and their doctors.
| S-EPMC3810172 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe emergence of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors offered dyslipidemia patients an alternative to statins for lipid-lowering treatment. Understanding patient and physician preferences for lipid-lowering drugs may promote shared decision-making and improve treatment outcomes.MethodsThis study utilized an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) to assess the relative importance (RI) of six attributes related to lipid-lowering drugs, including frequency of administration, mode of administration, reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level, risk of myopathy, risk of liver damage, and out-of-pocket monthly cost. Respondents were recruited from dyslipidemia patients and cardiovascular physicians in China. A mixed logit model and latent class analysis were employed to estimate the preference coefficient, marginal willingness to pay (mWTP), and RI of attributes. Ethical approval has been obtained for this study.ResultsA total of 708 patients and 507 physicians participated in the survey. Patients prioritized the 'risk of liver damage' (RI = 23.6%) with 'mode of administration' (RI = 19.2%) and 'frequency of administration' (RI = 18.8%) following closely. Contrarily, physicians prioritized the 'reduction of LDL-C level' (RI = 33.5%), followed by 'risk of liver damage' (RI = 26.0%) and 'risk of myopathy' (RI = 16.1%). Patients placed a higher value on 'frequency of administration' (p < .001) and 'mode of administration' (p < .001) compared to physicians, while physicians valued 'reduction of LDL-C level' (p < .001) and 'risk of myopathy' (p = .012) more than patients. Physicians exhibited higher mWTP than patients for all attributes except frequency and mode of administration. The LCA revealed three distinct patient classes: focus on oral administration, focus on hepatic safety and frequency and focus on hepatic safety and cost. Likewise, three physician classes were identified: frequency-insensitive, efficacy-focused and safety-focused.ConclusionsThe preferences for lipid-lowering drug therapy differed between patients and physicians in China. Physicians should take into account patients' preferences and provide personalized treatment when they formulate lipid-lowering treatment plans.Patient or public contributionPatients participated in the questionnaire design process. They engaged in a focus group discussion to determine attributes and levels and also participated in a pilot survey to assess the comprehensibility of the questionnaires. Additionally, patients were involved in the DCE survey to express their preferences. The findings of patient preference for lipid-lowering drug therapy will promote shared decision-making and optimize the treatment regimen.
| S-EPMC11002318 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Other-regarding preferences are considered to be the foundation of human cooperation. However, the evolutionary origin of this behavior in humans remains poorly understood. So far, comparative studies in primates have led to mixed conclusions probably due to methodological differences relating to both task complexity and the types of control conditions used. Moreover, no clear link between phylogenetic relatedness and prosociality has been found, suggesting that other convergent selection pressures may play a role in the evolution of such behaviors. Here, using one of the cognitively less demanding tasks, we show for the first time, that dogs can behave pro-socially by donating food to a conspecific partner, but only if the partner is familiar. This highlights the importance of considering the social relationships between individuals when testing animals for other-regarding behaviors. Moreover, by including a social control condition, we show that the dogs' prosocial response was not due to a simple social facilitation effect. The current findings support recent proposals that other convergent selection pressures, such as dependence on cooperative activities, rather than genetic relatedness to humans, may shape a species' propensity for other-regarding behaviors.
| S-EPMC4680958 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Surgical interventions for knee osteoarthritis (OA) have markedly different procedure attributes and may have dramatic differences in patient desirability. A total of 323 patients with knee OA were included in a dual response, choice-based conjoint analysis to identify the relative preference of 9 different procedure attributes. A model was also developed to simulate how patients might respond if presented with the real-world knee OA procedures, based on conservative assumptions regarding their attributes. The "amount of cutting and removal of the existing bone" required for a procedure had the highest preference score, indicating that these patients considered it the most important attribute. More specifically, a procedure that requires the least amount of bone cutting or removal would be expected to be the most preferred surgical alternative. The model also suggested that patients who are younger and report the highest pain levels and greatest functional limitations would be more likely to opt for surgical intervention.
| S-EPMC5613842 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsCommunicating information about the risks and benefits of benzodiazepines so that it is meaningful to the patient has not been previously described. This study aims to determine patient preferences regarding information received before initiating a benzodiazepine.MethodsAn online survey was distributed through social media and advertisements to Canadians ≥18 years old over a 6-month period (May-Oct 2022) to collect participant's rating of importance of statements and factors about the risk and benefits of benzodiazepines before initiating treatment using a 10-point Likert-type scale. Treatment preferences based on efficacy and risk information were also elicited. The survey was developed and pilot-tested in collaboration with an advisory committee of individuals with lived and living experience with benzodiazepine use.ResultsThirty-seven participants responded to the survey (mean age 30 years old, 81.1% identified as female). The majority of respondents had a history of anxiety (83.8%) or insomnia (32.4%), and 10 (27.0%) respondents had used a benzodiazepine. Patient counseling related to withdrawal symptoms of benzodiazepines, risk of harm in combination with other sedating agents, risk of physical and psychological dependence, and risk of effects on cognition were rated high in the importance of receiving this information before starting a benzodiazepine relative to efficacy endpoints, such as improvement in sleep parameters. When provided with information about the chance of efficacy and risk of harm, 100% would have selected cognitive behavioral therapy as the best treatment option. The most frequently reported source of medication information where patients have sought information was from the internet (25.0%), followed by doctors (21.9%) and pharmacists (18.8%).ConclusionsThis study identified patient important factors and statements viewed as important to communicate before initiating a benzodiazepine. The findings of this survey study will help inform decision-making when considering treatment options for managing anxiety or insomnia.
| S-EPMC10690834 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), provides patients with an alternative to subcutaneously or intravenously administered biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Little is known about patient preference for novel RA treatments.ObjectiveTo investigate patient preferences for attributes associated with RA treatments.MethodsA choice-based conjoint survey was mailed to 1400 randomly selected commercially insured patients (aged 21-80 years) diagnosed with RA, who were continuously enrolled from May 1, 2012, through April 30, 2013, and had ≥2 medical claims for International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis code 714.0 and no previous biologic DMARD use. Treatment attributes included route of administration; monthly out-of-pocket cost; frequency of administration; ability to reduce daily joint pain and swelling; likelihood of serious adverse events; improvement in the ability to perform daily tasks; and medication burden. Mean attribute importance scores were calculated after adjusting for patient demographics (eg, age, sex, years since diagnosis) using a hierarchical Bayes model. Patient preferences for each treatment attribute were ranked by the importance score. Part-worth utilities (ie, preference scores) were used to perform a conjoint market simulation.ResultsA total of 380 patients (response rate, 27.1%) returned the survey. Their mean age (± standard deviation) was 54.9 (± 9.3) years. Nonrespondents were 2 years younger (mean, 52.9 years; P = .002) but did not differ significantly from respondents in known clinical characteristics. After adjustment for demographic characteristics, mean patients' ranking of treatment attribute importance, in decreasing order, was route of administration, 34.1 (± 15.5); frequency of administration, 16.4 (± 6.8); serious adverse events, 12.0 (± 9.3); cost, 10.1 (± 6.2); medication burden, 9.8 (± 8.2); joint pain reduction, 8.9 (± 3.8); and daily tasks improvement, 8.8 (± 4.7). For the route of administration attribute, the part-worth utility was highest for the oral route. Conjoint simulation results showed that 56.4% of respondents would prefer an oral route of administration.ConclusionBased on this survey completed by 380 patients with RA, commercially insured patients with RA consider the route of administration to be the most important attribute of their RA treatment. In this study, the majority (56.4%) of patients preferred the oral route of administration over other routes. Understanding patient preferences may help to inform provider and payer decisions in treatment selection that may enhance patient adherence to therapy.
| S-EPMC4856233 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To assess the influence of patient preferences and urologist recommendations in treatment decisions for clinically localized prostate cancer.We enrolled 257 men with clinically localized prostate cancer (prostate-specific antigen <20; Gleason score 6 or 7) seen by urologists (primarily residents and fellows) in 4 Veterans Affairs medical centers. We measured patients' baseline preferences prior to their urology appointments, including initial treatment preference, cancer-related anxiety, and interest in sex. In longitudinal follow-up, we determined which treatment patients received. We used hierarchical logistic regression to determine the factors that predicted treatment received (active treatment v. active surveillance) and urologist recommendations. We also conducted a directed content analysis of recorded clinical encounters to determine if urologists discussed patients' interest in sex.Patients' initial treatment preferences did not predict receipt of active treatment versus surveillance, ??2(4) = 3.67, P = 0.45. Instead, receipt of active treatment was predicted primarily by urologists' recommendations, ??2(2) = 32.81, P < 0.001. Urologists' recommendations, in turn, were influenced heavily by medical factors (age and Gleason score) but were unrelated to patient preferences, ??2(6) = 0, P = 1. Urologists rarely discussed patients' interest in sex (<15% of appointments).Patients' treatment decisions were based largely on urologists' recommendations, which, in turn, were based on medical factors (age and Gleason score) and not on patients' personal views of the relative pros and cons of treatment alternatives.
| S-EPMC5587215 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background and objectivesLarger weight gain and higher ultrafiltration rates have been associated with poorer outcomes among patients on dialysis. Dietary restrictions reduce fluid-related risk; however, adherence is challenging. Alternative fluid mitigation strategies include treatment time extension, more frequent dialysis, adjunct peritoneal dialysis, and wearable ultrafiltration devices. No data regarding patient preferences for fluid management exist. A survey was designed, tested, and administered to assess patient-stated preferences regarding fluid mitigation.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsA written survey concerning fluid-related symptoms, patient and treatment characteristics, and fluid management preferences was developed. The cross-sectional survey was completed by 600 patients on hemodialysis at 18 geographically diverse ambulatory facilities. Comparisons of patient willingness to engage in volume mitigation strategies across fluid symptom burden, dietary restriction experience, and patient characteristics were performed.ResultsFinal analyses included 588 surveys. Overall, if allowed to liberalize fluid intake, 44.6% of patients were willing to extend treatment time by 15 minutes. Willingness to extend treatment time was incrementally less for longer treatment extensions; 12.2% of patients were willing to add a fourth weekly treatment session, and 13.5% of patients were willing to participate in nocturnal dialysis three nights per week. Patients more bothered by their fluid restrictions (versus less bothered) were more willing to engage in fluid mitigation strategies. Demographic characteristics and symptoms, such as cramping and dyspnea, were not consistently associated with willingness to engage in the proposed strategies. More than 25% of patients were unsure of their dry weights and typical interdialytic weight gains.ConclusionsPatients were generally averse to treatment time extension>15 minutes. Patients more bothered (versus less bothered) by their prescribed fluid restrictions were more willing to engage in volume mitigation strategies. Additional study of patient-stated preferences in hemodialysis treatment practices is needed to guide patient care and identify deficiencies in patient treatment and disease-related knowledge.
| S-EPMC4123390 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Anticoagulants are the recommended treatment for venous thromboembolic disease (VTE). The mode of anticoagulant administration may influence compliance, and therefore the effectiveness of the treatment. Unlike in atrial fibrillation or cancer-associated thrombosis, there is only limited data on patient preferences regarding the choice of anticoagulation in VTE. This study aims to evaluate patient preferences regarding anticoagulants in terms of administration: types (oral or injectable treatment) and number of doses or injections per day. Patients and Methods: This is a national survey through a questionnaire sent by e-mail to 1936 French vascular physicians between February and April 2019. They recorded the responses for each patient admitted for VTE. Results: Three hundred and eleven (response rate of 16%) of the 1936 contacted physicians responded for 364 patients. Among these, there were 167 fully completed questionnaires. Most patients (63%) express concerns about VTE and prefer oral treatment (81.5%), justified by the ease of administration (74%) and a fear of the injections (22%). When patients were taking more than three oral treatments they statistically chose injectable treatment more often (54%) than oral treatment (25%, p = 0.002). Patients who chose injectable treatment were also older (70 ± 16 vs. 58 ± 17 years old, p = 0.001). There was no statistically difference in anticoagulation preference according to gender or to the expected duration of treatment (6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months or unlimited). When oral treatment was preferred (81%), most chose oral treatment without dose adjustment and biomonitoring (74.3%). Among them, very few (5.8%) preferred a twice-daily intake. Conclusion: Patient preference in terms of anticoagulant treatment in VTE disease is in favor of oral treatment without adjustment or biomonitoring and with once-daily intake. When an injectable treatment is chosen, a prolonged duration of treatment does not seem to be a constraint for the patient. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier [NCT03889457].
| S-EPMC8255622 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundShared 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.MethodsA 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.ResultsOf 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.ConclusionsPhysicians and patients had important preference differences for cancer treatment. More sufficient communication is needed in cancer treatment decision-making.
| S-EPMC10657542 | biostudies-literature