重度抑郁障碍的治疗偏好:使用患者经验的形成性定性研究。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Susan dosReis, Laura M Bozzi, Beverly Butler, Richard Z Xie, Richard H Chapman, Jennifer Bright, Erica Malik, Julia F Slejko
{"title":"重度抑郁障碍的治疗偏好:使用患者经验的形成性定性研究。","authors":"Susan dosReis,&nbsp;Laura M Bozzi,&nbsp;Beverly Butler,&nbsp;Richard Z Xie,&nbsp;Richard H Chapman,&nbsp;Jennifer Bright,&nbsp;Erica Malik,&nbsp;Julia F Slejko","doi":"10.1007/s40271-022-00596-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The goals of this formative research are to elicit attributes of treatment and desired outcomes that are important to individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD), to develop a stated preference instrument, and to pre-test the instrument.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A three-phase survey study design elicited the patient's journey with MDD to design and pre-test the discrete choice experiment (DCE) instrument. Participants were 20 adults aged ≥ 18 with MDD who did not also have bipolar disorder or post-partum depression. We engaged patient advocates and a multi-disciplinary stakeholder advisory group to select and refine attributes for inclusion in a DCE instrument. The DCE was incorporated into a survey that also collected depression treatment and management and sociodemographic characteristics. The DCE was pre-tested with ten adults with MDD.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six attributes were included in the DCE: mode of treatment (medicine only, psychotherapy only, all modalities including brain stimulation), time to treatment effect (6, 9, 12 weeks), days of hopefulness (2, 4, 6 days/week), effect on productivity (40%, 60%, 90% increase), relations with others (strained, improved, no impact), and out-of-pocket costs ($30, $60, $90/month). The DCE test led to the refinement of mode of treatment (medicine, medicine and psychotherapy, and all modalities); time to treatment effect (4, 6, 9 weeks); monthly out-of-pocket costs ($30, $90, $270).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>MDD treatment preferences revealed trade-offs among mode of treatment, time to treatment effect, functional outcomes, and cost. The findings demonstrate the potential for meaningfully incorporating the patient experience in preference measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":51271,"journal":{"name":"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9483243/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preferences for Treatments for Major Depressive Disorder: Formative Qualitative Research Using the Patient Experience.\",\"authors\":\"Susan dosReis,&nbsp;Laura M Bozzi,&nbsp;Beverly Butler,&nbsp;Richard Z Xie,&nbsp;Richard H Chapman,&nbsp;Jennifer Bright,&nbsp;Erica Malik,&nbsp;Julia F Slejko\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40271-022-00596-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The goals of this formative research are to elicit attributes of treatment and desired outcomes that are important to individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD), to develop a stated preference instrument, and to pre-test the instrument.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A three-phase survey study design elicited the patient's journey with MDD to design and pre-test the discrete choice experiment (DCE) instrument. Participants were 20 adults aged ≥ 18 with MDD who did not also have bipolar disorder or post-partum depression. We engaged patient advocates and a multi-disciplinary stakeholder advisory group to select and refine attributes for inclusion in a DCE instrument. The DCE was incorporated into a survey that also collected depression treatment and management and sociodemographic characteristics. The DCE was pre-tested with ten adults with MDD.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six attributes were included in the DCE: mode of treatment (medicine only, psychotherapy only, all modalities including brain stimulation), time to treatment effect (6, 9, 12 weeks), days of hopefulness (2, 4, 6 days/week), effect on productivity (40%, 60%, 90% increase), relations with others (strained, improved, no impact), and out-of-pocket costs ($30, $60, $90/month). The DCE test led to the refinement of mode of treatment (medicine, medicine and psychotherapy, and all modalities); time to treatment effect (4, 6, 9 weeks); monthly out-of-pocket costs ($30, $90, $270).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>MDD treatment preferences revealed trade-offs among mode of treatment, time to treatment effect, functional outcomes, and cost. The findings demonstrate the potential for meaningfully incorporating the patient experience in preference measures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51271,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9483243/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-022-00596-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-022-00596-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:本形成性研究的目的是引出对重度抑郁症(MDD)患者重要的治疗属性和期望结果,开发一种声明偏好工具,并对该工具进行预测试。方法:采用三期调查研究设计,以MDD患者的经历为线索,设计并预测离散选择实验(DCE)仪器。参与者为20名年龄≥18岁的重度抑郁症患者,且没有双相情感障碍或产后抑郁症。我们聘请了患者倡导者和一个多学科利益相关者咨询小组来选择和完善DCE仪器的属性。DCE被纳入了一项调查,该调查还收集了抑郁症的治疗和管理以及社会人口特征。对10名重度抑郁症患者进行了DCE预测。结果:DCE包括六个属性:治疗方式(仅药物,仅心理治疗,所有方式包括脑刺激),治疗效果时间(6,9,12周),希望天数(2,4,6天/周),对生产力的影响(40%,60%,90%增加),与他人的关系(紧张,改善,无影响),以及自付费用(30美元,60美元,90美元/月)。DCE测试导致了治疗模式的改进(医学,医学和心理治疗,以及所有模式);治疗效果观察时间(4、6、9周);每月自付费用(30美元、90美元、270美元)。结论:重度抑郁症的治疗偏好揭示了治疗方式、治疗效果时间、功能结局和成本之间的权衡。研究结果表明,有可能有意义地将患者的经验纳入偏好措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Preferences for Treatments for Major Depressive Disorder: Formative Qualitative Research Using the Patient Experience.

Preferences for Treatments for Major Depressive Disorder: Formative Qualitative Research Using the Patient Experience.

Objectives: The goals of this formative research are to elicit attributes of treatment and desired outcomes that are important to individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD), to develop a stated preference instrument, and to pre-test the instrument.

Methods: A three-phase survey study design elicited the patient's journey with MDD to design and pre-test the discrete choice experiment (DCE) instrument. Participants were 20 adults aged ≥ 18 with MDD who did not also have bipolar disorder or post-partum depression. We engaged patient advocates and a multi-disciplinary stakeholder advisory group to select and refine attributes for inclusion in a DCE instrument. The DCE was incorporated into a survey that also collected depression treatment and management and sociodemographic characteristics. The DCE was pre-tested with ten adults with MDD.

Results: Six attributes were included in the DCE: mode of treatment (medicine only, psychotherapy only, all modalities including brain stimulation), time to treatment effect (6, 9, 12 weeks), days of hopefulness (2, 4, 6 days/week), effect on productivity (40%, 60%, 90% increase), relations with others (strained, improved, no impact), and out-of-pocket costs ($30, $60, $90/month). The DCE test led to the refinement of mode of treatment (medicine, medicine and psychotherapy, and all modalities); time to treatment effect (4, 6, 9 weeks); monthly out-of-pocket costs ($30, $90, $270).

Conclusions: MDD treatment preferences revealed trade-offs among mode of treatment, time to treatment effect, functional outcomes, and cost. The findings demonstrate the potential for meaningfully incorporating the patient experience in preference measures.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research
Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
8.30%
发文量
44
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Patient provides a venue for scientifically rigorous, timely, and relevant research to promote the development, evaluation and implementation of therapies, technologies, and innovations that will enhance the patient experience. It is an international forum for research that advances and/or applies qualitative or quantitative methods to promote the generation, synthesis, or interpretation of evidence. The journal has specific interest in receiving original research, reviews and commentaries related to qualitative and mixed methods research, stated-preference methods, patient reported outcomes, and shared decision making. Advances in regulatory science, patient-focused drug development, patient-centered benefit-risk and health technology assessment will also be considered. Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in The Patient may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances. All manuscripts are subject to peer review by international experts.
×
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