Literature DB >> 19126249

Identifying patient-relevant endpoints among individuals with schizophrenia: an application of patient-centered health technology assessment.

Elizabeth T Kinter1, Annette Schmeding, Ina Rudolph, Susan dosReis, John F P Bridges.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Schizophrenia imposes a great burden on society, and while evaluation should play an important role in informing society's efforts to alleviate these burdens, it is unclear what "endpoints" should be chosen as the objective of such analyses. The objectives of the study were to elicit endpoints directly from patients with schizophrenia, to ascertain whether patients are sufficiently cognoscente to express what endpoints are and are not important to them and to rank the relevant endpoints.
METHODS: We applied principles of patient-centered health technology assessment to identify and value endpoints from the patient's perspective. Focus groups were conducted to elicit endpoints, using interpretive phenomalogical analysis (IPA) to guide the collection, analysis and interpretation of data. Patient interviews were subsequently used to elicit patient preference over endpoints. Respondents were presented with cards outlining the endpoints and asked to remove irrelevant cards. They where then asked to identify and rank their five most relevant endpoints in order of importance. Interviews were recorded for the purposed of triangulation, and data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Patients were recruited from five geographically diverse cities in Germany. Eligibility required a diagnosis of schizophrenia by a physician and treatment with an antipsychotic medication for at least one year. Respondents were excluded if they were experiencing an acute episode.
RESULTS: Thirteen endpoints emerged as important from the focus groups spanning side-effects, functional status, processes of care and clinical outcomes. Respondents could clearly identify relevant and irrelevant endpoints, and rank which factors were important to them. Triangulation between field notes of the ranking exercise and recordings confirmed that rankings were not arbitrary, but justified from the respondents' point of view.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with schizophrenia can express preferences over endpoints. Our results show that qualitative methods such as IPA can be used to identify factors, but ranking exercises provide a more robust method for ranking the importance of endpoints. Future research involving patients with schizophrenia ranking outcomes is needed to identify variations across patients and methods such as conjoint analysis could prove beneficial in identifying acceptable tradeoffs across endpoints.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19126249     DOI: 10.1017/S0266462309090059

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care        ISSN: 0266-4623            Impact factor:   2.188


  22 in total

1.  Consumer preferences for hearing aid attributes: a comparison of rating and conjoint analysis methods.

Authors:  John F P Bridges; Angela T Lataille; Christine Buttorff; Sharon White; John K Niparko
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2012-04-17

Review 2.  A descriptive review on methods to prioritize outcomes in a health care context.

Authors:  Inger M Janssen; Ansgar Gerhardus; Milly A Schröer-Günther; Fülöp Scheibler
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-08-25       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Focus Groups in Elderly Ophthalmologic Patients: Setting the Stage for Quantitative Preference Elicitation.

Authors:  Marion Danner; Vera Vennedey; Mickaël Hiligsmann; Sascha Fauser; Stephanie Stock
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Preferences for family involvement among veterans in treatment for schizophrenia.

Authors:  Amy N Cohen; Eric R Pedersen; Shirley M Glynn; Alison B Hamilton; Kirk P McNagny; Christopher Reist; Eran Chemerinski; Alexander S Young
Journal:  Psychiatr Rehabil J       Date:  2019-03-28

5.  A comparison of two experimental design approaches in applying conjoint analysis in patient-centered outcomes research: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Elizabeth T Kinter; Thomas J Prior; Christopher I Carswell; John F P Bridges
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.883

6.  Involving patients in HTA activities at local level: a study protocol based on the collaboration between researchers and knowledge users.

Authors:  Marie-Pierre Gagnon; Johanne Gagnon; Michèle St-Pierre; François-Pierre Gauvin; Florence Piron; Marc Rhainds; Martin Coulombe; Dolores Lepage-Savary; Marie Desmartis; Mylène Tantchou Dipankui; France Légaré
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2012-01-16       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Comparing the Preferences of Patients and the General Public for Treatment Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.

Authors:  Norah L Crossnohere; Sarah Janse; Ellen Janssen; John F P Bridges
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 3.883

8.  A test of concordance between patient and psychiatrist valuations of multiple treatment goals for schizophrenia.

Authors:  John F P Bridges; Lara Slawik; Annette Schmeding; Jens Reimer; Dieter Naber; Olaf Kuhnigk
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-06-14       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  Identifying and prioritizing strategies for comprehensive liver cancer control in Asia.

Authors:  John F P Bridges; Gisselle Gallego; Masatoshi Kudo; Kiwamu Okita; Kwang-Hyub Han; Sheng-Long Ye; Barri M Blauvelt
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-11-02       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Introducing the patient's perspective in hospital health technology assessment (HTA): the views of HTA producers, hospital managers and patients.

Authors:  Marie-Pierre Gagnon; Marie Desmartis; Johanne Gagnon; Michèle St-Pierre; François-Pierre Gauvin; Marc Rhainds; Dolorès Lepage-Savary; Martin Coulombe; Mylène Tantchou Dipankui; France Légaré
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-10-10       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.