A qualitative interview study exploring patient views and experiences of treatment for hidradenitis suppurativa in the UK.

IF 11 1区 医学 Q1 DERMATOLOGY
Laura Howells, Paul Leighton, Kim S Thomas, Fiona Collier, Angela Gibbons, Ceri Harris, Kerry Hood, Muhammad Riaz, Jeremy Rodrigues, Helen Stanton, Emma Thomas-Jones, John R Ingram
{"title":"A qualitative interview study exploring patient views and experiences of treatment for hidradenitis suppurativa in the UK.","authors":"Laura Howells, Paul Leighton, Kim S Thomas, Fiona Collier, Angela Gibbons, Ceri Harris, Kerry Hood, Muhammad Riaz, Jeremy Rodrigues, Helen Stanton, Emma Thomas-Jones, John R Ingram","doi":"10.1093/bjd/ljaf046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a long-term skin condition where evidence for management after first line treatment fails is limited, and practice varies across the UK. Both medical and surgical treatment options are potential avenues for treatment. Furthermore, patient perspectives on HS treatments have received little attention in research to date.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore patients' views and experiences of treatment for HS to inform clinical care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A nested qualitative study within a prospective cohort study. Interviews with 35 participants were completed by telephone. Purposive sampling was undertaken. Framework analysis was used to develop themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Views on treatments: Past experiences and knowledge informed patient beliefs and whether an individual felt a treatment option was appropriate or a good 'fit' for them at a specific moment in time. Healthcare professional recommendations can be influential on both patient's views and which treatment option they ultimately receive. Experiences of treatments: There were positive experiences across all treatment types used within the study. Negative experiences included side effects of medications, lack of efficacy, delays to procedures, and burden of wound care. However, even when personal experiences were not wholly positive for an individual, participants often believed the same treatment may potentially help others with HS, due to the importance placed on personalisation of treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This paper has implications for how healthcare professionals discuss treatment options with people with HS. A 'one size fits all' approach is inappropriate, and shared decision making that elicits patient beliefs and preferences is crucial.</p>","PeriodicalId":9238,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Dermatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":11.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjd/ljaf046","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a long-term skin condition where evidence for management after first line treatment fails is limited, and practice varies across the UK. Both medical and surgical treatment options are potential avenues for treatment. Furthermore, patient perspectives on HS treatments have received little attention in research to date.

Aim: To explore patients' views and experiences of treatment for HS to inform clinical care.

Methods: A nested qualitative study within a prospective cohort study. Interviews with 35 participants were completed by telephone. Purposive sampling was undertaken. Framework analysis was used to develop themes.

Results: Views on treatments: Past experiences and knowledge informed patient beliefs and whether an individual felt a treatment option was appropriate or a good 'fit' for them at a specific moment in time. Healthcare professional recommendations can be influential on both patient's views and which treatment option they ultimately receive. Experiences of treatments: There were positive experiences across all treatment types used within the study. Negative experiences included side effects of medications, lack of efficacy, delays to procedures, and burden of wound care. However, even when personal experiences were not wholly positive for an individual, participants often believed the same treatment may potentially help others with HS, due to the importance placed on personalisation of treatment.

Conclusions: This paper has implications for how healthcare professionals discuss treatment options with people with HS. A 'one size fits all' approach is inappropriate, and shared decision making that elicits patient beliefs and preferences is crucial.

一项定性访谈研究,探讨英国化脓性扁桃体炎患者的观点和治疗经验。
背景:化脓性汗腺炎(HS)是一种长期皮肤病,一线治疗失败后的治疗证据有限,英国各地的实践各不相同。药物治疗和手术治疗都是潜在的治疗途径。此外,迄今为止,患者对HS治疗的看法在研究中很少受到关注。目的:探讨HS患者对治疗的看法和体会,为临床护理提供参考。方法:前瞻性队列研究中的嵌套定性研究。对35名参与者的访谈是通过电话完成的。进行了有目的的抽样。使用框架分析来制定主题。结果:对治疗的看法:过去的经验和知识影响了患者的信念,以及个体是否认为治疗方案在特定时刻适合或适合他们。医疗保健专业人员的建议对患者的观点和最终接受的治疗方案都有影响。治疗经验:研究中使用的所有治疗类型都有积极的经验。负面经历包括药物副作用、缺乏疗效、手术延误和伤口护理负担。然而,即使个人经历对个人来说并不完全是积极的,由于个性化治疗的重要性,参与者通常认为同样的治疗可能会帮助其他患有HS的人。结论:本文对卫生保健专业人员如何与HS患者讨论治疗方案具有启示意义。“一刀切”的方法是不合适的,共同决策,引起患者的信念和偏好是至关重要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
British Journal of Dermatology
British Journal of Dermatology 医学-皮肤病学
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
3.90%
发文量
1062
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Dermatology (BJD) is committed to publishing the highest quality dermatological research. Through its publications, the journal seeks to advance the understanding, management, and treatment of skin diseases, ultimately aiming to improve patient outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信