1
|
Juhnke C, Mühlbacher AC. Which body functions and activities matter for stroke patients? Study protocol for best-Worst scalings to value core elements of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0295267. [PMID: 38060585 PMCID: PMC10703233 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0295267] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2022] [Accepted: 11/17/2023] [Indexed: 12/18/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stroke is a common, serious, and disabling healthcare problem with increasing incidence and prevalence. Following a stroke, identifying the factors associated with decisions about rehabilitation interventions is important to assess rehabilitation after stroke. The aim is to guide clinical staff to make patient-centered decisions. Fundamentally, decision makers cannot draw on evidence to consider the relevance of distinct functions and activities from the patient's perspective. Until now, outcomes of rehabilitation are generally categorized using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). This can be seen as a conceptual basis for the assessment of health and disability. Since the ICF does not distinguish importance between these aspects there is a need to value the most important clinical factors as well as related activities from a patients and public perspective to help guide therapists in effectively designing post-acute rehabilitation care for individuals following stroke. The research question is which ICF body functions and activities are of value to stroke patients? Which trade-offs are patients willing to make within the core elements? Health preference research (HPR) answers the need to develop additional preference weights for certain ICF dimensions. Patient preference information (PPI) values health conditions based on the ICF from a patient perspective. METHODS In this study we conduct three best-worst scaling (BWS) experiments to value body function and activities from patients' and public perspective. Out of all ICF dimensions this research covers health conditions relevant to stroke patients in terms of body function, perception, and activities of daily living. Stroke patients as well as members of the general population will be recruited to participate in the online BWS surveys. Fractional, efficient designs are applied regarding the survey design. Conditional and multinominal logit analyses will be used as the main analysis method, with the best-worst count analysis as a secondary analysis. The survey is being piloted prior to commencing the process of data collection. Results are expected by the autumn of 2023. DISCUSSION The research will add to the current literature on clinical decision-making in stroke rehabilitation and the value of certain body functions as well as related activities in neurorehabilitation. Moreover, the study will show whether body functions and activities that are currently equally weighted in international guidelines are also equally important from the point of view of those affected, or whether there are disconcordances in terms of differences between public judgements and patients' preferences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christin Juhnke
- Health Economics and Health Care Management, Hochschule Neubrandenburg, Neubrandenburg, Germany
| | - Axel Christian Mühlbacher
- Health Economics and Health Care Management, Hochschule Neubrandenburg, Neubrandenburg, Germany
- Duke Department of Population Health Sciences and Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dobischok S, Metcalfe RK, Matzinger EA, Lock K, Harrison S, MacDonald S, Amara S, Schechter MT, Bansback N, Oviedo-Joekes E. Feasibility of Testing Client Preferences for Accessing Injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment (iOAT): A Pilot Study. Patient Prefer Adherence 2022; 16:3405-3413. [PMID: 36582266 PMCID: PMC9793789 DOI: 10.2147/ppa.s391532] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2022] [Accepted: 11/23/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) is an effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). To our knowledge, no research has systematically studied client preferences for accessing iOAT. Incorporating preferences could help meet the heterogenous needs of clients and make addiction care more person-centred. This paper presents a pilot study of a best-worst scaling (BWS) preference elicitation survey that aimed to assess if the survey was feasible and accessible for our population and to test that the survey could gather sound data that would suit our planned analyses. PATIENTS AND METHODS Current and former iOAT clients (n = 18) completed a BWS survey supported by an interviewer using a think-aloud approach. The survey was administered on PowerPoint, and responses and contextual field notes were recorded manually. Think-aloud audio was recorded on Audacity. RESULTS Clients' feedback fell into five categories: framing of the task, accessibility, conceptualization of attributes and levels, formatting, and behaviour predicting questions. Survey repetitiveness was the most consistent feedback. The data simulation showed that 100 responses should provide an adequate sample size. CONCLUSION This pilot demonstrates the type of analysis that can be done with BWS in our population, suggests that such analysis is feasible, and highlights the importance of the interviewer and participant working side-by-side throughout the task.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophia Dobischok
- Centre for Health Evaluation & Outcome Sciences, Providence Health Care, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Rebecca K Metcalfe
- Centre for Health Evaluation & Outcome Sciences, Providence Health Care, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | - Kurt Lock
- Centre for Health Evaluation & Outcome Sciences, Providence Health Care, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- BC Centre for Disease Control, Provincial Health Services Authority, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Scott Harrison
- Providence Health Care, Providence Crosstown Clinic, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Scott MacDonald
- Providence Health Care, Providence Crosstown Clinic, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Sherif Amara
- SafePoint Supervised Consumption Site, Fraser Health Authority, Surrey, BC, Canada
| | - Martin T Schechter
- Centre for Health Evaluation & Outcome Sciences, Providence Health Care, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Nick Bansback
- Centre for Health Evaluation & Outcome Sciences, Providence Health Care, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Eugenia Oviedo-Joekes
- Centre for Health Evaluation & Outcome Sciences, Providence Health Care, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Correspondence: Eugenia Oviedo-Joekes, Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, St. Paul’s Hospital, 575-1081 Burrard St, Vancouver, BC, V6Z 1Y6, Canada, Tel +1 604-682-2344 Ext. 62973, Fax +1-604-806-8210, Email
| |
Collapse
|