Improving patient-physician dialog: commentary on the results of the MS Choices survey

Preferences, Adherence, and Satisfaction: Three Years of Treatment Experiences of People with Multiple Sclerosis

Background

To reduce the risk of long-term disability in people with Multiple Sclerosis (pwMS), an increasing number of disease-modifying immune therapies (DMT) are available, involving diverse mechanisms of action, levels of efficacy, treatment risks, and tolerability aspects. Including patient preferences and expectations in shared decision-making may improve treatment satisfaction, adherence, and persistence.

Purpose

To investigate long-term alignment of individual preferences and expectations of pwMS with their actual DMT and its effect on treatment satisfaction, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), adherence, and treatment discontinuation.

Methods

A total of 401 pwMS beginning a new DMT were enrolled from 2015 to 2018 in a non-interventional study at three German MS centres. Patient preferences regarding DMT, TSQM-9, SF36, and self-reported adherence as well as relapses and EDSS were recorded at baseline and every 3 to 6 months for up to 3 years.

Results

Efficacy and tolerability were the highest-ranking preferences at baseline. Actual selection of DMT corresponded more closely to safety than efficacy, tolerability, or convenience preferences. Participants reported excellent adherence throughout the study. DMT persistence was 69.0%, with earlier discontinuation for injectable vs oral or infusion therapies. Breakthrough disease, rather than patient-reported outcomes, was the main driver of DMT discontinuation. For all routes of administration, global treatment satisfaction increased over time despite lower satisfaction with convenience. Several patterns of changing preferences were observed.

Conclusion

This study provides insight into the interaction of DMT preferences of pwMS with their actual treatment experience. Treatment decisions should be aligned with long-term expectations of pwMS to promote continuous adherence.

A Qualitative Study of Health Care Professionals' Views on Bowel Care in Multiple Sclerosis: Whose Job Is It Anyway?

BACKGROUND

Bowel dysfunction, including constipation and fecal incontinence, is prevalent in individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS), adversely affecting quality of life and increasing caregiver burden. How health care professionals (HCPs) identify, assess, and manage people with MS with bowel dysfunction is understudied. This study explored how HCPs think about, assess, and manage bowel dysfunction in individuals with MS.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted with 18 HCPs from different professional disciplines and clinical specialties recruited from UK National Health Service primary, secondary, and tertiary care services using purposive and chain referral sampling through professional networks. One participant worked for a bladder and bowel charity. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Views differed regarding responsibilities for providing bowel care. Participants thought individuals with MS should notify HCPs of bowel symptoms and take responsibility for self-management where possible, with family caregivers required to help with bowel care. Although people with MS were often referred to bladder and bowel specialists when a crisis point was reached, earlier referral was called for by these HCPs. There were variations in assessment processes, treatment options offered, and service provision. Participants thought HCPs needed more education on bowel dysfunction, bowel care should take a high priority, and evidence-based clinical guidelines and referral pathways would improve service delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

The HCPs caring for individuals with MS see many with bowel dysfunction, and there is variation in care and service provision; HCPs require more education, evidence-based clinical guidelines, and referral pathways to improve case finding, assessment, and management of these symptoms for individuals with MS.

Effect of Health Care Providers' Focused Discussion and Proactive Education About Relapse Management on Patient Reporting of Multiple Sclerosis Relapse

Background

Treatments for multiple sclerosis (MS) relapse include intravenous corticosteroids and repository corticotropin injection. Despite available treatment, in the Multiple Sclerosis in America 2017 survey, only 47% of patients reported always/often contacting their MS health care provider (HCP) during relapse. In this study, the Multiple Sclerosis in America 2017 survey participants who received intravenous corticosteroids or repository corticotropin injection for treatment of past relapses completed a follow-up survey to understand how patients characterize relapse severity and to explore predictors of patients contacting their HCP during a relapse.

Methods

Patients were 18 years and older, diagnosed as having MS by an HCP, and currently using disease-modifying therapy. Patients completed an online survey assessing relapse characteristics and interactions with the HCP treating the patient's MS. Regression analysis identified predictors of patients contacting their HCP during relapse.

Results

Mean age of the 126 respondents was 49.2 years, 81.0% were female, and most (80.2%) had one or more relapses in the past 2 years. Patients estimated that 38.3% of their relapses were mild; 45.1%, moderate; and 16.6%, severe. Number and frequency of symptoms increased with relapse severity. Less than half (46.0%) reported they were extremely likely to contact their HCP during a relapse. The best predictors of being likely to contact the HCP during relapse were the HCP having previously discussed the importance of immediately communicating a relapse and patients' willingness to accept the HCP's recommendation for relapse treatment.

Conclusions

Findings highlight the importance of HCPs' advance discussions with patients with MS regarding relapse management to increase the likelihood patients will contact their HCP during relapse.

An ID-Associated Application to Facilitate Patient-Tailored Management of Multiple Sclerosis

Despite improvements in diagnosis and treatment, multiple sclerosis (MS) is the leading neurological cause of disability in young adults. As a chronic disease, MS requires complex and challenging management. In this context, eHealth has gained an increasing relevance. Here, we aim to summarize beneficial features of a mobile app recently implemented in clinical MS routine as well as beyond MS. PatientConcept is a CE-certified, ID-associated multilingual software application allowing patients to record relevant health data without disclosing any identifying data. Patients can voluntarily share their health data with selected physicians. Since its implementation in 2018, about 3000 MS patients have used PatientConcept. Initially developed as a physician–patient communication platform, the app maps risk management plans of all current disease modifying therapies and thereby facilitates adherence to specified monitoring appointments. It also allows continuous monitoring of various PROs (Patient Reported Outcomes), enabling a broad overview of the disease course. In addition, various studies/projects currently assess monitoring, follow-up, diagnostics and telemetric evaluations of patients with other diseases beyond MS. Altogether, PatientConcept offers a broad range of possibilities to support physician–patient communication, implementation of risk management plans and assessment of PROs. It is a promising tool to facilitate patient-tailored management of MS and other chronic diseases.

Patients and neurologists have different perceptions of multiple sclerosis symptoms, care and challenges

BACKGROUND

Basic steps in the management of patients with Multiple Sclerosis (MS), such as good patient understanding of the disease and active participation in its management are extremely important, as they directly influence treatment adherence and success. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the perception of MS patients and neurologists pertaining to the most common disease symptoms, disabilities that impact on quality of life, and patient concerns and difficulties during medical visits, as information that can be used to improve the doctor-patient relationship.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study involving two groups: the first composed of neurologists and the second of patients. Participants of the first group were selected by a Steering Committee (15 predetermined neurologists representing each region of Brazil and specialized in MS and neuroimmunological disorders, who also assumed the role of creating the survey and questionnaire). Participants of the second group were selected following dissemination of a questionnaire on the AME's social networks (Amigos Múltiplos pela Esclerose, a non-governmental organization to support patients with MS). Questions about sociodemographic data, disease impact on quality of life, symptoms perception, and concerns and issues regarding disease care were put to both groups.

RESULTS

A total of 317 patients and 182 neurologists answered the questionnaires. Significant divergences were found between the perceptions of patients and neurologists in relation to orientation and information given during medical appointments, and also regarding patient participation in treatment and therapy choice. Considering the topic assessing impact on quality of life, more than 70% of neurologists perceived that autonomy to work and travel, and future planning were aspects that most affected patient lives, however, almost 50% of patients reported that disease monitoring did not affect their life in any way. Analysis of data regarding MS symptoms revealed neurologists to consider physical symptoms, such as ambulation issues, imbalance, falls and urinary incontinence, to be those most interfering with patient quality of life, whereas patients considered non-physical symptoms, such as fatigue, pain, cognitive and memory problems to be more significant. Patients with primary progressive MS complained more about ambulation issues, imbalance and falls (p<0.05), when compared to patients with other disease phenotypes.

CONCLUSION

Significant differences in disease perception were found in this study. While neurologists tended to overestimate the consequences and symptoms of the disease, for most patients, the disease impact on activities did not appear to be as significant, with more complaints regarding non-physical symptoms. Although neurologists described involving patients in treatment decisions and providing them with appropriate orientation during medical appointments, the opposite was reported by patients. These results may help to improve treatment adherence and disease outcomes by redefining the doctor-patient relationship.

Chances and Challenges of Registry-Based Pharmacovigilance in Multiple Sclerosis: Lessons Learnt from the Implementation of the Multicenter REGIMS Registry

The long-term and potential rare side effects of new immunomodulating drugs for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) are often not well known. Spontaneous case report systems of adverse drug effects are a valuable source in pharmacovigilance, but have several limitations. Primary data collections within registries allow a comprehensive analysis of potential side effects, but face several challenges. This article will outline the chances and challenges of registry-based adverse event reporting, using the example of the German immunotherapeutic registry REGIMS. REGIMS is an observational, clinical multicenter registry that aims to assess the incidence, type, and consequences of side effects of MS immunotherapies. Patients treated with an approved MS medication are recruited by their physicians during routine visits in hospitals, outpatient clinics, and MS-specialized practices. REGIMS incorporates an electronic physician-based documentation in each center and a paper-based patient documentation, both at baseline and regular follow-up visits. By the end of 2019, 43 REGIMS centers were actively recruiting patients and performing follow-up documentations. The majority of the first 1000 REGIMS patients were female (69.3%), had relapse-remitting MS (89.8%), and were treated with a second-line therapy. During the implementation of REGIMS, several logistic and procedural challenges had to be overcome, which are outlined in this paper. Pharmacovigilance registries such as REGIMS provide high-quality primary data from a specific patient population in a real-world care setting and enable pharmacovigilance research that cannot be carried out using secondary data. Despite the logistic and procedural challenges in establishing a multicenter pharmacovigilance registry in Germany, the advantages outweigh the drawbacks.

Modeling the impact of patient treatment preference on health outcomes in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Aims: Model how moving from current disease-modifying drug (DMD) prescribing patterns for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) observed in the United Kingdom (UK) to prescribing patterns based on patient preferences would impact health outcomes over time.Materials and methods: A cohort-based Markov model was used to measure the effect of DMDs on long-term health outcomes for individuals with RRMS. Data from a discrete choice experiment were used to estimate the market shares of DMDs based on patient preferences (i.e. preference shares). These preference shares and real-world UK market shares were used to calculate the effect of prescribing behavior on relapses, disability progression, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The incremental benefit of patient-centered prescribing over current practices for the UK RRMS population was then estimated; scenario and sensitivity analyses were also conducted.Results: Compared to current prescribing practices, when UK patients with RRMS were treated following patient preferences, health outcomes were improved. This population was expected to experience 501,690 relapses and gain 1,003,263 discounted QALYs over 50 years under patient-centered prescribing practices compared to 538,417 relapses and 958,792 discounted QALYs under current practices (-6.8% and +4.6%, respectively). Additionally, less disability progression was observed when prescribed treatment was based on patient preferences. In a scenario analysis where only oral treatments were considered, the results were similar, although the magnitude of benefit was smaller. Number of relapses was most sensitive to how the annualized relapse rate was modeled; disability progression was most sensitive to mortality rate assumptions.Limitations: Treatment efficacy estimates applied to various models in this study were based on data derived from clinical trials, rather than real-world data; the impact of patient-centered prescribing on treatment adherence and/or switching was not modeled.Conclusions: The population of UK RRMS patients may experience overall health gains if patient preferences are better incorporated into prescribing practices.

Joint Healthcare Professional and Patient Development of Communication Tools to Improve the Standard of MS Care

Introduction

Effective communication between patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) is important to enhance outcomes in multiple sclerosis (MS). However, in practice, patients often report a disconnect in communication. Communication tools to aid patient–HCP communication have a long history of use in many chronic conditions. For example, symptom diaries have been shown to enhance outcomes in cancer, headache and sleep disorder management. MS in the 21st Century, a Steering Group of HCP specialists and patients with MS (PwMS), has created two communication tools designed for use by both patients and their HCPs.

Methods

The Steering Group first identified prominent issues in patient–HCP communication through group discussions and survey data. Following this, a series of workshops led to the development of two communication tools as potential solutions to these identified issues in communication.

Results

The two most prominent issues identified were HCP time constraints during appointments and the misalignment of patient and HCP priorities—the communication tools developed through the workshops were created to address these. The “myMS priorities” tool [see supplementary materials] is designed to maximize the use of consultation time while the “myMS commitments” tool [see supplementary materials] aims to improve patient–HCP shared decision-making.

Conclusions

The MS in the 21st Century Steering Group adopted a broad, iterative and collaborative approach in the development of these tools to help ensure they would be as useful as possible to both HCPs and PwMS. These tools have been developed through shared patient–HCP expertise and are based on existing tools in other therapy areas as well as a review of the existing literature and data from MS in the 21st Century Steering Group surveys. The next steps will focus on the validation of these tools through testing them in real-world environments and clinical trials.

Funding

Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

Electronic Supplementary Material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-019-01071-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Patient Power Revolution in Multiple Sclerosis: Navigating the New Frontier

A debate on shared decision making in multiple sclerosis (MS) was led by a patient advocate and leading neurologists from the MS in the 21st Century Steering Group. Key themes and salient points which emerged from the debate and audience discussions are reported in this article. Arguments against shared decision making included the fact that physicians study and practice for years to reach their level of expertise, and that the level of understanding required to make these decisions may not be possible to communicate to patients within time-limited consultations. Furthermore, unreliable online information, information overload or information with marketing bias may also cloud patients’ judgements. Arguments for patient engagement focussed on how ownership of decisions can lead to improved adherence and outcomes, and a strengthening of the physician–patient relationship. Shared decision making requires educating patients to make informed decisions and to understand the risks and consequences of their choices. However, shared decision making may not be the correct option for every patient, and the level of involvement must be driven by the patient. To support patients’ engagement and promote responsible management of their condition, physicians need to (1) foster and maintain a positive, ongoing relationship with their patients, and (2) provide patients with timely, accurate, and understandable information. There was broad agreement that the patient voice should be heard more in discussions around the future of MS care. MS in the 21st Century offers a model for patient involvement in partnership with MS healthcare specialists, and the steering group is currently considering these issues and developing tools and solutions to enhance patient–physician communication and relationships.

Funding Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

Impact of Shared Decision Making on Disease-Modifying Drug Adherence in Multiple Sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) and adherence to treatment are an integral part of multiple sclerosis (MS) care. A collaborative process, SDM actively involves the patient, the health care provider, and an extended network in making treatment decisions. Adherence to disease-modifying drug therapies in patients with MS presents an ongoing challenge for patients and health care providers due to the chronic nature of this disease. This narrative review aims to explore the impact of SDM on adherence based on existing literature and to identify new approaches to optimizing adherence.

METHODS

A search was conducted using medical subject heading terms, including decision-making, adherence, shared decision-making, compliance, and patient-centered care.

RESULTS

Shared decision making between patients and clinicians promotes adherence to the treatment plan in MS. A proactive SDM approach is based on patient preferences, education, and engagement. Providing credible and accurate sources of information is essential for improving patient engagement. Home monitoring, computerized models, and active patient engagement are a few new approaches to improve adherence in patients with MS.

CONCLUSIONS

Shared decision-making interventions can have a positive effect on patient adherence to disease-modifying drug therapy in MS care. A range of new strategies is emerging that may help promote optimal disease management.

Patient satisfaction and healthcare services in specialized multiple sclerosis centres in Germany

Background:

As patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) require lifelong treatment, optimization of therapy with respect to efficacy and safety is needed to limit long-term disease progression. Patients with MS also need a range of health-related services. Satisfaction with these as well as treatment is clinically relevant because satisfied patients are more likely to adhere to therapy. The aim of this study was to determine the status of patient satisfaction and of healthcare services in 70 specialized MS centres in Germany.

Methods:

In 2011, patients with MS responded to a questionnaire, which solicited clinical and demographic information, as well as patients’ perceptions of their overall situation and their satisfaction with treatment.

Results:

Of 2791 patients surveyed, 81.9% had relapsing-remitting MS with mild disability [mean (standard deviation) Expanded Disability Status Scale score: 2.6 (1.8)]. Disease activity data were collected from 2205 patients, of whom 57.6% had remained relapse-free during the preceding 12 months. However, 38.9% had experienced one or more relapses, most of whom (67.3%) while receiving immunomodulatory treatment. About one-third of the patients indicated that they were more dissatisfied with their overall situation compared with the time before diagnosis. However, many patients (58.3%) were satisfied with their existing medication. Overall, 72.8% of patients would prefer oral to injectable treatments, assuming there was no difference in their efficacy.

Conclusions:

A substantial proportion of patients experienced breakthrough disease on treatment and may potentially benefit from a change of therapy. Although largely satisfied with treatment, most patients with MS would choose oral over injectable treatments.

The state of multiple sclerosis: current insight into the patient/health care provider relationship, treatment challenges, and satisfaction

BACKGROUND

Managing multiple sclerosis (MS) treatment presents challenges for both patients and health care professionals. Effective communication between patients with MS and their neurologist is important for improving clinical outcomes and quality of life.

METHODS

A closed-ended online market research survey was used to assess the current state of MS care from the perspective of both patients with MS (≥18 years of age) and neurologists who treat MS from Europe and the US and to gain insight into perceptions of treatment expectations/goals, treatment decisions, treatment challenges, communication, and satisfaction with care, based on current clinical practice.

RESULTS

A total of 900 neurologists and 982 patients completed the survey, of whom 46% self-identified as having remitting-relapsing MS, 29% secondary progressive MS, and 11% primary progressive MS. Overall, patients felt satisfied with their disease-modifying therapy (DMT); satisfaction related to comfort in speaking with their neurologist and participation in their DMT decision-making process. Patients who self-identified as having relapsing-remitting MS were more likely to be very satisfied with their treatment. Top challenges identified by patients in managing their DMT were cost, side effects/tolerability of treatment, and uncertainty if treatment was working. Half of the patients reported skipping doses, but only 68% told their health care provider that they did so.

CONCLUSION

Several important differences in perception were identified between patients and neurologists concerning treatment selection, satisfaction, expectations, goals, and comfort discussing symptoms, as well as treatment challenges and skipped doses. The study results emphasize that patient/neurologist communication and patient input into the treatment decision-making process likely influence patient satisfaction with treatment.

Patient and Physician Perspectives on MSdialog, an Electronic PRO Diary in Multiple Sclerosis

Background

MSdialog, a web- and mobile-based software application, captures data on self-administration of subcutaneous interferon β-1a, clinical outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes in patients with multiple sclerosis outside the clinic.

Methods

Patient and healthcare professional reactions to MSdialog were surveyed; participants rated benefits of MSdialog detailed in an explanatory video. A 6-week pilot study of patients with multiple sclerosis then assessed MSdialog usability. After participating in a training teleconference, patients completed weekly health reports via MSdialog, plus two usability surveys (weeks 3 and 6) and an exploratory follow-up telephone interview.

Results

Seventy-six patients, 92 neurologists and 40 multiple sclerosis nurses completed the MSdialog benefits survey. Highly motivating benefits for patients included sharing information with healthcare providers and capturing patient-reported outcomes data; healthcare providers were highly motivated by data availability on patient-reported outcomes and adherence. Thirty-nine of 42 enrolled patients completed the pilot study. Overall, 87 % of patients stated that completion of patient-reported outcomes with MSdialog fitted in “fairly well” to “extremely well” with their weekly routine. At week 6, 77 % of patients were “very satisfied” or “extremely satisfied” with their MSdialog experience; 82 % considered it better than previous methods for tracking their health and 95 % would recommend using MSdialog. Most patients were highly motivated to use MSdialog; reasons given included “helps me remember what to mention to my doctor”.

Conclusion

MSdialog was considered easy to use and superior to patients’ previous methods for tracking health. The ability to provide valuable data to healthcare providers offers the potential to improve patient–physician communication and engagement.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40271-015-0140-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Long-term adherence of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis to subcutaneous self-injections of interferon β-1a using an electronic device: the RIVER study

OBJECTIVES

The BRIDGE study has previously shown a high short-term (12 weeks) adherence rate (>85%) of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) to subcutaneous self-injections of interferon β-1a using an electronic auto-injection device (RebiSmart®). The primary goal of the RIVER study was to investigate in a real-life setting the long-term adherence to the use of RebiSmart among patients enrolled in the parent BRIDGE study.

METHODS

The RIVER study was designed as a real-life extension study of the BRIDGE trial. RRMS patients who completed BRIDGE and still had an indication for treatment were included. Data were collected prospectively through the RebiSmart device, and analyzed retrospectively. Long term adherence (administration of ≥ 80% of injections) to and safety of RebiSmart were assessed. The expected follow-up period ranged from 19 to 26 months.

RESULTS

A total of 57 RRMS patients participated in the follow-up study. The mean observation period was 20.5 ± 5.7 months. The overall adherence to the use of RebiSmart in the entire study cohort was 79.8% (median = 85.2%, range = 16-100%). There were 36 patients (63.2%) who completed at least 80% of the scheduled injections. No statistically significant differences were found between adherent and non-adherent patients in terms of age, sex, duration of the observation period, and occurrence of relapses. No serious treatment-related adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed a high level of long-term adherence to the use of RebiSmart, with 63.2% of participants meeting the criterion for adherence to treatment.

Designing an Electronic Patient Management System for Multiple Sclerosis: Building a Next Generation Multiple Sclerosis Documentation System

BACKGROUND

Technologies like electronic health records or telemedicine devices support the rapid mediation of health information and clinical data independent of time and location between patients and their physicians as well as among health care professionals. Today, every part of the treatment process from diagnosis, treatment selection, and application to patient education and long-term care may be enhanced by a quality-assured implementation of health information technology (HIT) that also takes data security standards and concerns into account. In order to increase the level of effectively realized benefits of eHealth services, a user-driven needs assessment should ensure the inclusion of health care professional perspectives into the process of technology development as we did in the development process of the Multiple Sclerosis Documentation System 3D. After analyzing the use of information technology by patients suffering from multiple sclerosis, we focused on the needs of neurological health care professionals and their handling of health information technology.

OBJECTIVE

Therefore, we researched the status quo of eHealth adoption in neurological practices and clinics as well as health care professional opinions about potential benefits and requirements of eHealth services in the field of multiple sclerosis.

METHODS

We conducted a paper-and-pencil-based mail survey in 2013 by sending our questionnaire to 600 randomly chosen neurological practices in Germany. The questionnaire consisted of 24 items covering characteristics of participating neurological practices (4 items), the current use of network technology and the Internet in such neurological practices (5 items), physicians' attitudes toward the general and MS-related usefulness of eHealth systems (8 items) and toward the clinical documentation via electronic health records (4 items), and physicians' knowledge about the Multiple Sclerosis Documentation System (3 items).

RESULTS

From 600 mailed surveys, 74 completed surveys were returned. As much as 9 of the 10 practices were already connected to the Internet (67/74), but only 49% preferred a permanent access. The most common type of HIT infrastructure was a complete practice network with several access points. Considering data sharing with research registers, 43% opted for an online interface, whereas 58% decided on an offline method of data transmission. eHealth services were perceived as generally useful for physicians and nurses in neurological practices with highest capabilities for improvements in clinical documentation, data acquisition, diagnosis of specific MS symptoms, physician-patient communication, and patient education. Practices specialized in MS in comparison with other neurological practices presented an increased interest in online documentation. Among the participating centers, 91% welcomed the opportunity of a specific clinical documentation for MS and 87% showed great interest in an extended and more interconnected electronic documentation of MS patients. Clinical parameters (59/74) were most important in documentation, followed by symptomatic parameters like measures of fatigue or depression (53/74) and quality of life (47/74).

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians and nurses may significantly benefit from an electronically assisted documentation and patient management. Many aspects of patient documentation and education will be enhanced by eHealth services if the most informative measures are integrated in an easy-to-use and easily connectable approach. MS-specific eHealth services were highly appreciated, but the current level of adoption is still behind the level of interest in an extended and more interconnected electronic documentation of MS patients.

Perspectives and experiences of Dutch multiple sclerosis patients and multiple sclerosis-specialized neurologists on injectable disease-modifying treatment

BACKGROUND

The adherence to treatment with injectable disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) in multiple sclerosis (MS) may benefit from adequate information provision and management of expectations. The communication between patients and physicians is very important in this respect. The current study investigated the perspectives and experiences of the MS patients and neurologists concerning the choice and course of treatment with DMDs in the Netherlands.

METHODS

The MS patients (aged 18-60 years; diagnosed with MS at least a year ago, currently treated with injectable DMD treatment) and MS-specialized neurologists (practicing for ≥3 years, treating ≥15 MS patients/month on average, and spending >60% of their time in clinical practice) were asked to complete semistructured Internet-based questionnaires. The neurologists in this study were not necessarily the treating neurologists of the participating MS patients.

RESULTS

In all, 107 MS patients and 18 MS-specialized neurologists completed the questionnaires. The MS-specialized neurologists in this study reported discussing most of the suggested treatment goals with their patients. The MS patients indicated that certain important treatment goals, ie, reduction in disease progression, reduction or prolongation of time to long-term disability, and reduction in new magnetic resonance imaging lesions, were not discussed with them. More than one-quarter of the patients (27%) would appreciate more information about their treatment. We found evidence for suboptimal patient adherence to MS therapy (23% indicated taking a treatment break) due to diverse side effects, lack of efficacy, or practical issues. As compared to these patient reports, the scale of poor adherence was overestimated by more than half of the neurologists (on average, 30% estimated treatment breaks).

CONCLUSION

The MS patients and MS-specialized neurologists in this study differ in their experiences and perspectives on information provision and adherence to DMDs. Education programs and up-to-date information on MS treatments for both neurologists and patients may be helpful in improving patient involvement and patient-physician communication.

Future MS care: a consensus statement of the MS in the 21st Century Steering Group

The "MS in the 21st Century" initiative was established with the purpose of (1) defining how multiple sclerosis (MS) treatment and standards of care should look in the 21st century; (2) developing a minimum standard of care across the world; and (3) motivating the broad MS community to align standards of care and challenge the current treatment paradigm. The aim was to develop a consensus statement to reach and influence the broader MS community. An expert steering group from Europe and Canada-consisting of neurologists, patient advocates, a pharmacoepidemiologist/pharmacoeconomist, and representatives from national MS centers-participated in a series of workshop-driven meetings between February 2011 and 2012. After three phases of discussions, the steering group identified that the overall vision for future care of MS should be full access to personalized treatment, with reimbursement, to achieve freedom from disease. They constructed seven overall principles that support this vision: personalized care, patient engagement, commitment to research, regulatory body education and reimbursement issues, new endpoints in clinical trials, more therapy options, and MS centers of excellence. This consensus statement outlines the key aspects of the seven principles that need to be addressed. The "MS in the 21st Century Steering Group" hopes that this consensus statement acts as a call to action for healthcare providers and decision-makers to address simultaneously the overarching principles that will guide patient management in order to improve outcomes for people with MS.