Literature DB >> 10730720

Determinants of patients' treatment preferences in a clinical trial.

M A Awad1, S H Shapiro, J P Lund, J S Feine.   

Abstract

Several researchers have suggested that patients' preferences for a particular form of treatment should be taken into account in clinical trials. Preferences may influence the outcome of treatment, especially in trials when patients cannot be blinded to the type of treatment received and the outcome is based on patients' evaluations of therapy. Participants in this study were 136 edentulous patients who took part in a randomised controlled clinical trial comparing two types of treatments for edentulism: conventional dentures and implant-supported prostheses. Prior to receiving treatment, subjects were required to complete a questionnaire regarding their satisfaction with their present prostheses. In addition, they were asked to indicate which treatment they would prefer if given a choice. The objective of this study was to determine whether there are important differences among study participants between patients who have a treatment preference and those who do not. The effects of satisfaction with pre-treatment prostheses, age, gender and level of education on preferences were examined. Level of satisfaction with the original dentures and level of education were significant predictors of preference. Compared to subjects who rated their satisfaction with their current condition as 'low', the odds ratios associated with having a preference for implant treatment were 0.31 (95% CI: 0.09 to 0.96) for subjects who rated their prostheses in the 'medium' range and 0.11 (95% CI: 0.03 to 0.41) for those who rated in the 'high' range. In addition, subjects with high levels of education were significantly less likely to have a preference for either conventional or implant treatments (OR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.77 and OR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.76, respectively) compared to those with low education. Neither age nor gender was a significant predictor of preference. We suggest that study designs which incorporate patients' preferences must take into account possible differences between preference groups that might confound the relationship between preference and the outcome of interest.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10730720     DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0528.2000.028002119.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Community Dent Oral Epidemiol        ISSN: 0301-5661            Impact factor:   3.383


  10 in total

1.  The healthcare buffet: preferences in the clinical decision-making process for patients with musculoskeletal pain.

Authors:  Joel E Bialosky; Josh A Cleland; Paul Mintken; Jason M Beneciuk; Mark D Bishop
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2021-10-17

2.  Predictors of treatment preference for mandibular fracture.

Authors:  Claudia Der-Martirosian; Melanie W Gironda; Edward E Black; Thomas R Belin; Kathryn A Atchison
Journal:  J Public Health Dent       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 1.821

3.  Baseline characteristics and treatment preferences of oral surgery patients.

Authors:  Kathryn A Atchison; Melanie W Gironda; Edward E Black; Stuart Schweitzer; Claudia Der-Martirosian; Alan Felsenfeld; Richard Leathers; Thomas R Belin
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 1.895

4.  Assessment of preferences for treatment: validation of a measure.

Authors:  Souraya Sidani; Dana R Epstein; Richard R Bootzin; Patricia Moritz; Joyal Miranda
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.228

5.  Attitudes of dental patients towards participation in research.

Authors:  S Al-Amad; M Awad; H Silverman
Journal:  East Mediterr Health J       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 1.628

6.  Influences on older people's decision making regarding choice of topical or oral NSAIDs for knee pain: qualitative study.

Authors:  Dawn Carnes; Yasir Anwer; Martin Underwood; Geoff Harding; Suzanne Parsons
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-12-04

7.  Transhiatal vs extended transthoracic resection in oesophageal carcinoma: patients' utilities and treatment preferences.

Authors:  A G E M de Boer; P F M Stalmeier; M A G Sprangers; J C J M de Haes; J W van Sandick; J B F Hulscher; J J B van Lanschot
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2002-03-18       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Dental Implant Supported Restorations Improve Quality of Life in Osteoporotic Women.

Authors:  Christine DeBaz; Jenna Hahn; Lisa Lang; Leena Palomo
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2015-06-03

9.  Developing a mobile application to better inform patients and enable effective consultation in implant dentistry.

Authors:  Erokan Canbazoglu; Yucel Batu Salman; Mustafa Eren Yildirim; Burak Merdenyan; Ibrahim Furkan Ince
Journal:  Comput Struct Biotechnol J       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 7.271

10.  Education and patient preferences for treating type 2 diabetes: a stratified discrete-choice experiment.

Authors:  Ellen M Janssen; Daniel R Longo; Joan K Bardsley; John Fp Bridges
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2017-10-06       Impact factor: 2.711

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.