OBJECTIVE: This study investigated and compared the valuation and perceived attainment of multiple treatment goals in schizophrenia from the perspectives of four different groups of stakeholders. METHOD: Twenty treatment goals (identified in a qualitative patient-based pre-study) were ranked and rated according to their relevance in standardized interviews. Goal attainment was also rated. A rank correlation was computed to identify congruencies among the stakeholder groups. A hierarchical cluster analysis of the data from the stakeholders groups was also conducted. RESULTS: In this study, 105 outpatients, 160 physicians, 50 relatives, and 30 payers were interviewed. All goals were considered very relevant by all stakeholder groups. "Improved cognitive abilities" was ranked among the top three goals by patients, physicians, and relatives, while "reduced disease-related symptoms" was ranked first by relatives and second by physicians. Payers gave the highest priority to goals that were more likely to affect costs (i.e., ability to resume work, reduced disease-related symptoms, less hospitalization/ need for outpatient visits). Pairwise agreement rates ranged from 38.9% to 63.3%. Rank correlations were found between relatives and patients (r=0.51; P=0.002), relatives and physicians (r=0.43; P=0.008), and payers and patients (r=0.43; P=0.008). The cluster analysis revealed a relevant congruency among patients, relatives, and physicians. Goal attainment was rated lower than goal relevance by all groups, with patients judging attainment the best on average, followed by relatives, physicians, and payers. Reduction in disease-related symptoms was rated as the goal that was best achieved. CONCLUSION: Discordances among the groups with respect to their valuation of treatment goals should encourage stakeholders to better understand others' preferences as a prerequisite for improved shared decision making and potentially improved treatment outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: This study investigated and compared the valuation and perceived attainment of multiple treatment goals in schizophrenia from the perspectives of four different groups of stakeholders. METHOD: Twenty treatment goals (identified in a qualitative patient-based pre-study) were ranked and rated according to their relevance in standardized interviews. Goal attainment was also rated. A rank correlation was computed to identify congruencies among the stakeholder groups. A hierarchical cluster analysis of the data from the stakeholders groups was also conducted. RESULTS: In this study, 105 outpatients, 160 physicians, 50 relatives, and 30 payers were interviewed. All goals were considered very relevant by all stakeholder groups. "Improved cognitive abilities" was ranked among the top three goals by patients, physicians, and relatives, while "reduced disease-related symptoms" was ranked first by relatives and second by physicians. Payers gave the highest priority to goals that were more likely to affect costs (i.e., ability to resume work, reduced disease-related symptoms, less hospitalization/ need for outpatient visits). Pairwise agreement rates ranged from 38.9% to 63.3%. Rank correlations were found between relatives and patients (r=0.51; P=0.002), relatives and physicians (r=0.43; P=0.008), and payers and patients (r=0.43; P=0.008). The cluster analysis revealed a relevant congruency among patients, relatives, and physicians. Goal attainment was rated lower than goal relevance by all groups, with patients judging attainment the best on average, followed by relatives, physicians, and payers. Reduction in disease-related symptoms was rated as the goal that was best achieved. CONCLUSION: Discordances among the groups with respect to their valuation of treatment goals should encourage stakeholders to better understand others' preferences as a prerequisite for improved shared decision making and potentially improved treatment outcomes.
Authors: Adrienne Nevola; Michael E Morris; Holly C Felix; Teresa Hudson; Nalin Payakachat; J Mick Tilford Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2020-11-19 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Steven G Potkin; Dragana Bugarski-Kirola; Chris J Edgar; Sherif Soliman; Stephanie Le Scouiller; Jelena Kunovac; Eugenio Miguel Velasco; George M Garibaldi Journal: CNS Spectr Date: 2014-10-01 Impact factor: 3.790
Authors: Steffen Moritz; Candelaria I Mahlke; Stefan Westermann; Friederike Ruppelt; Paul H Lysaker; Thomas Bock; Christina Andreou Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2018-02-15 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Steven G Potkin; Jean-Yves Loze; Carlos Forray; Ross A Baker; Christophe Sapin; Timothy Peters-Strickland; Maud Beillat; Anna-Greta Nylander; Peter Hertel; Simon Nitschky Schmidt; Anders Ettrup; Anna Eramo; Karina Hansen; Dieter Naber Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-08-24 Impact factor: 3.240