Anna Barabasch1, Karin Riemann-Lorenz2, Christopher Kofahl3,4, Jutta Scheiderbauer4, Desiree Eklund4, Ingo Kleiter5, Jürgen Kasper6, Sascha Köpke7, Susanne Lezius8, Antonia Zapf8, Anne Christin Rahn2,9, Christoph Heesen2,10. 1. Institute of Neuroimmunology and Multiple Sclerosis (INIMS), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Hamburg, Germany. a.barabasch@uke.de. 2. Institute of Neuroimmunology and Multiple Sclerosis (INIMS), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Hamburg, Germany. 3. Institute of Medical Sociology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Hamburg, Germany. 4. Patient representative, Hamburg, Trier, Germany. 5. Marianne-Strauß-Klinik, Behandlungszentrum Kempfenhausen für Multiple Sklerose Kranke gGmbH, Berg, Germany. 6. Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, OsloMET, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway. 7. Institute for Clinical Nursing Science, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. 8. Institute of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Hamburg, Germany. 9. Department of Health Services Research, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany. 10. Department of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A variety of management options (e.g. immunotherapies, lifestyle interventions, and rehabilitation) are available for people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Besides coping with the diagnosis, people with MS (pwMS) have to make complex decisions such as deciding about immunotherapies. In addition to factual information, reports of patient experiences (PEx) may support patients in decision-making. The added value of PEx in decision-making is not clear, and controlled studies are rare. Therefore, systematic methods are necessary to develop and analyse PEx. As there are no evaluated PEx for MS in Germany, we are currently creating a website presenting PEx structured according to topics and illustrated by video, audio, and text files. We aim to determine the feasibility of an intervention using PEx and evaluate whether PEx may help pwMS in their immunotherapy decision-making processes as a supplement to evidence-based information. METHODS: This project will follow the Medical Research Council framework for development and evaluation of complex interventions. After the development of a website with PEx, a randomised controlled pilot trial (pilot RCT) will be conducted in 2-3 MS centres, clinics, or rehabilitation centres including 55 pwMS and accompanied by a process evaluation. Patients with a RRMS diagnosis considering immunotherapy are eligible. The primary outcome is decision self-efficacy. Secondary outcomes include preparation for decision-making, decisional conflict, risk knowledge, confidence in active participation, affective forecasting, social support, and self-reported impact of eHealth on its users. Participants will be randomly assigned either to (i) an intervention group with 4 weeks access to an evidence-based patient information resource and the PExMS-website as an adjunct or to (ii) the control group with access to evidence-based information alone. A 6-member advisory panel involving representatives of pwMS, researchers, and neurologists, who accompany the whole project, will mentor this pilot RCT. DISCUSSION: The intervention was developed with systematic methods, created with active patient involvement and in critical appraisal by an expert advisory panel. The study is innovative as it contributes to the controversial evidence on the use of PEx in the context of evidence-based patient information. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04236544.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: A variety of management options (e.g. immunotherapies, lifestyle interventions, and rehabilitation) are available for people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Besides coping with the diagnosis, people with MS (pwMS) have to make complex decisions such as deciding about immunotherapies. In addition to factual information, reports of patient experiences (PEx) may support patients in decision-making. The added value of PEx in decision-making is not clear, and controlled studies are rare. Therefore, systematic methods are necessary to develop and analyse PEx. As there are no evaluated PEx for MS in Germany, we are currently creating a website presenting PEx structured according to topics and illustrated by video, audio, and text files. We aim to determine the feasibility of an intervention using PEx and evaluate whether PEx may help pwMS in their immunotherapy decision-making processes as a supplement to evidence-based information. METHODS: This project will follow the Medical Research Council framework for development and evaluation of complex interventions. After the development of a website with PEx, a randomised controlled pilot trial (pilot RCT) will be conducted in 2-3 MS centres, clinics, or rehabilitation centres including 55 pwMS and accompanied by a process evaluation. Patients with a RRMS diagnosis considering immunotherapy are eligible. The primary outcome is decision self-efficacy. Secondary outcomes include preparation for decision-making, decisional conflict, risk knowledge, confidence in active participation, affective forecasting, social support, and self-reported impact of eHealth on its users. Participants will be randomly assigned either to (i) an intervention group with 4 weeks access to an evidence-based patient information resource and the PExMS-website as an adjunct or to (ii) the control group with access to evidence-based information alone. A 6-member advisory panel involving representatives of pwMS, researchers, and neurologists, who accompany the whole project, will mentor this pilot RCT. DISCUSSION: The intervention was developed with systematic methods, created with active patient involvement and in critical appraisal by an expert advisory panel. The study is innovative as it contributes to the controversial evidence on the use of PEx in the context of evidence-based patient information. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04236544.
Authors: Carol Bennett; Ian D Graham; Elizabeth Kristjansson; Stephen A Kearing; Kate F Clay; Annette M O'Connor Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2009-06-26
Authors: C Heesen; J Pöttgen; A C Rahn; K Liethmann; J Kasper; L Vahter; J Drulovic; A Van Nunen; D Wilkie; Y Beckmann; F Paul; S Köpke; A Giordano; A Solari Journal: Mult Scler Relat Disord Date: 2017-09-21 Impact factor: 4.339
Authors: S Köpke; J Kasper; P Flachenecker; H Meißner; A Brandt; B Hauptmann; G Bender; I Backhus; A C Rahn; J Pöttgen; E Vettorazzi; C Heesen Journal: Clin Rehabil Date: 2016-07-10 Impact factor: 3.477
Authors: Vikki Ann Entwistle; Emma F France; Sally Wyke; Ruth Jepson; Kate Hunt; Sue Ziebland; Andrew Thompson Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2011-06-08
Authors: Saskia Elkhalii-Wilhelm; Anna Sippel; Karin Riemann-Lorenz; Christopher Kofahl; Jutta Scheiderbauer; Sigrid Arnade; Ingo Kleiter; Stephan Schmidt; Christoph Heesen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-05-27 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Donya Ghaidar; Anna Sippel; Karin Riemann-Lorenz; Christopher Kofahl; Rebecca Morrison; Ingo Kleiter; Stephan Schmidt; Christian Dettmers; Holger Schulz; Christoph Heesen Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-06-11 Impact factor: 2.908
Authors: Anna Sippel; Karin Riemann-Lorenz; Jana Pöttgen; Renate Wiedemann; Karin Drixler; Eva Maria Bitzer; Christine Holmberg; Susanne Lezius; Christoph Heesen Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2022-08-16 Impact factor: 3.298