José Antonio Sacristán1, Esther Artime2, Silvia Díaz-Cerezo1, Marta Comellas3, Lucía Pérez-Carbonell3, Luis Lizán3,4. 1. Medical Affairs, Eli Lilly and Company, Madrid, Spain. 2. Medical Affairs, Eli Lilly and Company, Madrid, Spain. artime_esther@lilly.com. 3. Outcomes'10, Jaume I University, Castellón de la Plana, Spain. 4. Department of Medicine, Jaume I University, Castellón de la Plana, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Patient support programs aim to provide solutions beyond the medication itself, by enhancing treatment adherence, improving clinical outcomes, elevating patient experience, and/or increasing quality of life. As patient support programs increasingly play an important role in assisting patients, numerous observational studies and pragmatic trials designed to evaluate their impact on healthcare have been conducted in recent years. This review aims to characterize these studies. METHODS: A systematic literature review, supplemented by a broad search of gray literature, was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and Cochrane recommendations. Observational studies and pragmatic trials conducted in Europe to evaluate the impact of patient support programs, published in English or Spanish between 17/03/2010 and 17/03/2020, were reviewed. Two patient support program definitions were applied starting with Ganguli et al.'s broad approach, followed by the European Medicines Agency definition, narrowed to Marketing Authorization Holders organized systems and their medicines. The quality of publications was assessed using the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement 22-item checklist. RESULTS: Of the 49 identified studies following the Ganguli et al. definition, 20 studies met the European Medicines Agency definition and were reviewed. Patient support program impact was evaluated based on a wide range of methodologies: 70% assessed patient support program-related patient-reported outcomes, 55% reported clinical outcomes, and 25% reported economic impacts on health resources. Only 45% conducted a comparative analysis. Overall, 75% of the studies achieved their proposed objectives. CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity of the observational studies reviewed reflects the complexity of patient support programs that are built ad hoc for specific diseases, treatments, and patients. Results suggest that patient support programs play a key role in promoting treatment effectiveness, clinical outcomes, and satisfaction. However, there is a need for standardizing the definition of patient support programs and the methods to evaluate their impact.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Patient support programs aim to provide solutions beyond the medication itself, by enhancing treatment adherence, improving clinical outcomes, elevating patient experience, and/or increasing quality of life. As patient support programs increasingly play an important role in assisting patients, numerous observational studies and pragmatic trials designed to evaluate their impact on healthcare have been conducted in recent years. This review aims to characterize these studies. METHODS: A systematic literature review, supplemented by a broad search of gray literature, was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and Cochrane recommendations. Observational studies and pragmatic trials conducted in Europe to evaluate the impact of patient support programs, published in English or Spanish between 17/03/2010 and 17/03/2020, were reviewed. Two patient support program definitions were applied starting with Ganguli et al.'s broad approach, followed by the European Medicines Agency definition, narrowed to Marketing Authorization Holders organized systems and their medicines. The quality of publications was assessed using the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement 22-item checklist. RESULTS: Of the 49 identified studies following the Ganguli et al. definition, 20 studies met the European Medicines Agency definition and were reviewed. Patient support program impact was evaluated based on a wide range of methodologies: 70% assessed patient support program-related patient-reported outcomes, 55% reported clinical outcomes, and 25% reported economic impacts on health resources. Only 45% conducted a comparative analysis. Overall, 75% of the studies achieved their proposed objectives. CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity of the observational studies reviewed reflects the complexity of patient support programs that are built ad hoc for specific diseases, treatments, and patients. Results suggest that patient support programs play a key role in promoting treatment effectiveness, clinical outcomes, and satisfaction. However, there is a need for standardizing the definition of patient support programs and the methods to evaluate their impact.
Authors: Jan P Vandenbroucke; Erik Von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Peter C Gøtzsche; Cynthia D Mulrow; Stuart J Pocock; Charles Poole; James J Schlesselman; Matthias Egger Journal: Gac Sanit Date: 2009-02-26 Impact factor: 2.139
Authors: Filip Van den Bosch; Andrew J K Ostor; Siegfried Wassenberg; Naijun Chen; Chen Wang; Vishvas Garg; Jasmina Kalabic Journal: Rheumatol Ther Date: 2017-03-30
Authors: M A van Maren; C E Wyers; J H M Driessen; J V Visser; F de Vries; K van de Wijdeven; S Gevers; W F Lems; M H Emmelot-Vonk; J P W van den Bergh Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2019-07-18 Impact factor: 4.507