Outcome preferences of older people with multiple chronic conditions and hypertension: a cross-sectional survey using best-worst scaling

Treatment burden in multimorbidity: an integrative review

BACKGROUND

People living with multimorbidity experience increased treatment burden, which can result in poor health outcomes. Despite previous efforts to grasp the concept of treatment burden, the treatment burden of people living with multimorbidity has not been thoroughly explored, which may limit our understanding of treatment burden in this population. This study aimed to identify the components, contributing factors, and health outcomes of treatment burden in people with multiple diseases to develop an integrated map of treatment burden experienced by people living with multimorbidity. The second aim of this study is to identify the treatment burden instruments used to evaluate people living with multimorbidity and assess the comprehensiveness of the instruments.

METHODS

This integrative review was conducted using the electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and reference lists of articles through May 2023. All empirical studies published in English were included if they explored treatment burden among adult people living with multimorbidity. Data extraction using a predetermined template was performed.

RESULTS

Thirty studies were included in this review. Treatment burden consisted of four healthcare tasks and the social, emotional, and financial impacts that these tasks imposed on people living with multimorbidity. The context of multimorbidity, individual's circumstances, and how available internal and external resources affected treatment burden. We explored that an increase in treatment burden resulted in non-adherence to treatment, disease progression, poor health status and quality of life, and caregiver burden. Three instruments were used to measure treatment burden in living with multimorbidity. The levels of comprehensiveness of the instruments regarding healthcare tasks and impacts varied. However, none of the items addressed the healthcare task of ongoing prioritization of the tasks.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed an integrated map illustrating the relationships between treatment burden, the context of multimorbidity, people's resources, and the health outcomes. None of the existing measures included an item asking about the ongoing process of setting priorities among the various healthcare tasks, which highlights the need for improved measures. Our findings provide a deeper understanding of treatment burden in multimorbidity, but more research for refinement is needed. Future studies are also needed to develop strategies to comprehensively capture both the healthcare tasks and impacts for people living with multimorbidity and to decrease treatment burden using a holistic approach to improve relevant outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/UF46V.

Incorporating Individual-Level Treatment Effects and Outcome Preferences Into Personalized Blood Pressure Target Recommendations

BACKGROUND

There are no shared decision-making frameworks for selecting blood pressure (BP) targets for individuals with hypertension. This study addressed whether results from the SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) could be tailored to individuals using predicted risks and simulated preferences.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Among 8202 SPRINT participants, Cox models were developed and internally validated to predict each individual's absolute difference in risk from intensive versus standard BP lowering for cardiovascular events, cognitive impairment, death, and serious adverse events (AEs). Individual treatment effects were combined using simulated preference weights into a net benefit, which represents a weighted sum of risk differences across outcomes. Net benefits were compared among those above versus below the median AE risk. In simulations for which cardiovascular, cognitive, and death events had much greater weight than the AEs of BP lowering, the median net benefit was 3.3 percentage points (interquartile range [IQR], 2.0-5.7), and 100% of participants had a net benefit favoring intensive BP lowering. When simulating benefits and harms to have similar weights, the median net benefit was 0.8 percentage points (IQR, 0.2-2.2), and 87% had a positive net benefit. Compared with participants at lower risk of AEs from BP lowering, those at higher risk had a greater net benefit from intensive BP lowering despite experiencing more AEs (P<0.001 in both simulations).

CONCLUSIONS

Most SPRINT participants had a predicted net benefit that favored intensive BP lowering, but the degree of net benefit varied considerably. Tailoring BP targets using each patient's risks and preferences may provide more refined BP target recommendations.

Assessing patient information needs for new antidiabetic medications to inform shared decision-making: A best-worst scaling experiment in China

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a patient-centred approach to improve the quality of care. An essential requirement for the SDM process is to be fully aware of patient information needs.

OBJECTIVES

Our study aimed to assess patient information needs for new antidiabetic medications using the best-worst scaling (BWS) experiment.

METHODS

BWS tasks were developed according to a literature review and the focus group discussion. We used a balanced incomplete block design and blocking techniques to generate choice sets. The final BWS contains 11 attributes, with 6-choice scenarios in each block. The one-to-one, face-to-face BWS survey was conducted among type 2 diabetic patients in Jiangsu Province. Results were analyzed using count-based analysis and modelling approaches. We also conducted a subgroup analysis to observe preference heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Data from 539 patients were available for analysis. The most desired information domain was the comparative effectiveness of new antidiabetic medications. It consists of the incidence of macrovascular complications, the length of extended life years, changes in health-related quality of life, the incidence of microvascular complications, and the control of glycated haemoglobin. Of all the attributes, the incidence of macrovascular complications was the primary concern. Patients' glycemic control and whether they had diabetes complications exerted a significant influence on their information needs.

CONCLUSIONS

Information on health benefits is of critical significance for diabetic patients. Patients have different information needs as their disease progresses. Personalized patient decision aids that integrate patient information needs and provide evidence of new antidiabetic medications are worthy of being established.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Before data collection, a pilot survey was carried out among diabetic patients to provide feedback on the acceptability and intelligibility of the attributes.

Ethical Aspects of Physician Decision-Making for Deprescribing Among Older Adults With Dementia

Importance

Physicians endorse deprescribing of risky or unnecessary medications for older adults (aged ≥65 years) with dementia, but there is a lack of information on what influences decisions to deprescribe in this population.

Objective

To understand how physicians make decisions to deprescribe for older adults with moderate dementia and ethical and pragmatic concerns influencing those decisions.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A cross-sectional national mailed survey study of a random sample of 3000 primary care physicians from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile who care for older adults was conducted from January 15 to December 31, 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The study randomized participants to consider 2 clinical scenarios in which a physician may decide to deprescribe a medication for older adults with moderate dementia: 1 in which the medication could cause an adverse drug event if continued and the other in which there is no evidence of benefit. Participants ranked 9 factors related to possible ethical and pragmatic concerns through best-worst scaling methods (from greatest barrier to smallest barrier to deprescribing). Conditional logit regression quantified the relative importance for each factor as a barrier to deprescribing.

Results

A total of 890 physicians (35.0%) returned surveys; 511 (57.4%) were male, and the mean (SD) years since graduation was 26.0 (11.7). Most physicians had a primary specialty in family practice (50.4% [449 of 890]) and internal medicine (43.5% [387 of 890]). A total of 689 surveys were sufficiently complete to analyze. In both clinical scenarios, the 2 greatest barriers to deprescribing were (1) the patient or family reporting symptomatic benefit from the medication (beneficence and autonomy) and (2) the medication having been prescribed by another physician (autonomy and nonmaleficence). The least influential factor was ease of paying for the medication (justice).

Conclusions and Relevance

Findings from this national survey study of primary care physicians suggests that understanding ethical aspects of physician decision-making can inform clinician education about medication management and deprescribing decisions for older adults with moderate dementia.

Perceived Importance of the Benefits and Harms of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Best-Worst Scaling Study

OBJECTIVES

To elicit the relative importance of the benefits and harms of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among potential screening participants in the Dutch population.

METHODS

In a consensus meeting with 11 experts, risk reduction of CRC and CRC deaths (benefits) and complications from colonoscopy, stress of receiving positive fecal immunological test (FIT) results, as well as false-positive and false-negative FIT results (harms) were selected as determinant end points to consider during decision making. We conducted an online best-worst scaling survey among adults aged 55 to 75 years from the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel of The Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research to elicit preference values for these outcomes. The preference values were estimated using conditional logit regression.

RESULTS

Of 265 participants, 234 (89%) had ever participated in CRC screening. Compared with the stress of receiving a positive FIT result, the outcome perceived most important was the risk of CRC death (odds ratio [OR] 4.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.9-5.1), followed by risk of CRC (OR 4.1; 95% CI 3.6-4.7), a false-negative FIT result (OR 3.1; 95% CI 2.7-3.5), colonoscopy complications (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4-1.8), and a false-positive FIT result (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.3-1.6). The magnitude of these differences in perceived importance varied according to age, educational level, ethnic background, and whether the individual had previously participated in CRC screening.

CONCLUSION

Dutch men and women eligible for FIT-based CRC screening perceive the benefits of screening to be more important than the harms.

Barriers and Facilitators in the Implementation of Prevention Strategies for Chronic Disease Patients-Best Practice GuideLines and Policies' Systematic Review

Visits of chronically ill patients account for 80% of primary care consultations. Approximately 15-38% of patients have three or more chronic diseases, and 30% of hospitalisations result from the deteriorating clinical condition of these patients. The burden of chronic disease and multimorbidity is increasing in combination with the growing population of elderly people. However, many interventions found to be effective in health service studies fail to translate into meaningful patient care outcomes across multiple contexts. With the growing burden of chronic diseases, healthcare providers, health policymakers, and other healthcare system stakeholders are re-examining their strategies and opportunities for more effective prevention and clinical interventions. The study aimed to find the best practice guidelines and policies influencing effective intervention and making it possible to personalize prevention strategies. Apart from clinical treatment, it is essential to increase the effectiveness of non-clinical interventions that could empower chronic patients to increase their involvement in therapy. The review focuses on the best practice guidelines and policies in non-medical interventions and the barriers to and facilitators of their implementation into everyday practice. A systematic review of practice guidelines and policies was conducted to answer the research question. The authors screened databases and included 47 full-text recent studies in the qualitative synthesis.

Fingolimod versus interferon beta 1-a: Benefit–harm assessment approach based on TRANSFORMS individual patient data

Background

Fingolimod is a disease-modifying drug approved for multiple sclerosis but its benefit–harm balance has never been assessed compared to other active treatments.

Objectives

Our aim was to compare the benefits and harms of fingolimod with interferon beta-1a using individual patient data from TRial Assessing injectable interferon versus FTY720 Oral in RRMS trial.

Methods

We modelled the health status of patients over time including Expanded Disability Status Scale measurements, relapses and any adverse events. We assessed the mean health status between arms and the proportion of patients whose health deteriorated or improved relatively to baseline, using a prespecified minimal important difference of 4.6. We performed sensitivity analyses to test our assumptions.

Results

Main and sensitivity analyses favoured fingolimod 0.5 mg over interferon beta-1a. The average health status difference was 1.01 (95% CI 0.93–1.08). Patients on fingolimod 0.5 mg were 0.47 (95% CI: 0.35–0.63, p < 0.001) times less likely to experience a relevant decline in health status compared to interferon beta-1a patients, with a number needed to treat of 7.10 [5.18, 11.23].

Conclusions

Fingolimod's net benefit over interferon beta-1a did not reach the clinical relevance over 1 year, but the decreased risk for health status deterioration may be more pronounced more long term and patients may prefer less treatment burden associated with fingolimod. [Formula: see text]

Sexual history taking: Doctors' clinical decision-making in primary care in the North West province, South Africa

BACKGROUND

Clinical reasoning is an important aspect of making a diagnosis for providing patient care. Sexual dysfunction can be as a result of cardiovascular or neurological complications of patients with chronic illness, and if a patient does not raise a sexual challenge, then the doctor should know that there is a possibility that one exists and enquire.

AIM

The aim of this research study was to assess doctors' clinical decision-making process with regards to the risk of sexual dysfunction and management of patients with chronic illness in primary care facilities of the North West province based on two hypothetical patient scenarios.

SETTING

This research study was carried out in 10 primary care facilities in Dr Kenneth Kaunda health district, North West province, a rural health district.

METHODS

This vignette study using two hypothetical patient scenarios formed part of a broader grounded theory study to determine whether sexual dysfunction as comorbidity formed part of the doctors' clinical reasoning and decision-making. After coding the answers, quantitative content analysis was performed. The questions and answers were then compared with standard answers of a reference group.

RESULTS

One of the doctors (5%) considered sexual dysfunction, but failed to follow through without considering further exploration, investigations or management. For the scenario of a female patient with diabetes, the reference group considered cervical health questions (p = 0.001) and compliance questions (p = 0.004) as standard enquiries, which the doctors from the North West province failed to consider. For the scenario of a male patient with hypertension and an ex-smoker, the reference group differed significantly by expecting screening for mental health and vision (both p = 0.001), as well as for HIV (p 0.001). The participating doctors did not meet the expectations of the reference group.

CONCLUSION

Good clinical reasoning and decision-making are not only based on knowledge, intuition and experience but also based on an awareness of human well-being as complex and multidimensional, to include sexual well-being.