Patient Values and Preferences for Managing Acute Dental Pain Elicited through Online Deliberation.

IF 2.2 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE JDR Clinical & Translational Research Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-04 DOI:10.1177/23800844231174398
T Dawson, S Pahlke, A Carrasco-Labra, D Polk
{"title":"Patient Values and Preferences for Managing Acute Dental Pain Elicited through Online Deliberation.","authors":"T Dawson, S Pahlke, A Carrasco-Labra, D Polk","doi":"10.1177/23800844231174398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Patient values and preferences (PVP) are among multiple sources of information panelists synthesize when developing clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Patient and public involvement (PPI) can be critical for learning PVP; however, the methodology for engaging patients in CPG development is lacking. Deliberative engagement is effective for obtaining public views on complex topics that require people to consider ethics, values, and competing perspectives.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Elicit comprehensive understanding of PVP concerning oral analgesics for managing acute dental pain consecutive to toothache and simple and surgical dental extractions, with consideration of associated outcomes, both desirable and undesirable.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Multistage engagement involving 2 electronic surveys and a 90-min online small group deliberative engagement. Adults who have experienced acute dental pain deliberated about 3 hypothetical scenarios stratified according to expected pain intensity, completed a postdeliberation survey, and validated a PVP statement developed by researchers based on review of qualitative data from deliberations and quantitative data from surveys.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants affirmed the PVP statement reflected their small group deliberations and their individual views. Most indicated that pain relief is critical to deciding which pain relief medicine they would want regardless of expected pain level. Most also identify as critical concerns about substance abuse or misuse, although many believe it unlikely that they will experience these outcomes over the brief prescription timeframe for acute dental pain. Participants identified agency in decision-making, consultation including \"better communication\" of options, and treatment actions tailored to life circumstances as key values.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Participants preferred nonprescription and nonopioid pain relief options. As expected pain levels increased, more participants expressed willingness to accept opioids, but more also mentioned rescue analgesia as a third outcome critical to decision-making. Online deliberative method provided opportunities for obtaining informed perspectives. Guideline developers and policymakers may find online deliberations useful for eliciting PVP related to health outcomes.</p><p><strong>Knowledge transfer statement: </strong>Study results informed the US Food and Drug Administration-funded clinical practice guideline on the management of acute dental pain. Findings may be a resource for clinicians in decision-making conversations with patients regarding expectations for pain relief and positive and negative outcomes of differing pain relief medications. Further research should pursue applicability of online deliberative engagement as a method to elicit patient values and preferences.</p>","PeriodicalId":14783,"journal":{"name":"JDR Clinical & Translational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10871022/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JDR Clinical & Translational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23800844231174398","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Patient values and preferences (PVP) are among multiple sources of information panelists synthesize when developing clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Patient and public involvement (PPI) can be critical for learning PVP; however, the methodology for engaging patients in CPG development is lacking. Deliberative engagement is effective for obtaining public views on complex topics that require people to consider ethics, values, and competing perspectives.

Objective: Elicit comprehensive understanding of PVP concerning oral analgesics for managing acute dental pain consecutive to toothache and simple and surgical dental extractions, with consideration of associated outcomes, both desirable and undesirable.

Methods: Multistage engagement involving 2 electronic surveys and a 90-min online small group deliberative engagement. Adults who have experienced acute dental pain deliberated about 3 hypothetical scenarios stratified according to expected pain intensity, completed a postdeliberation survey, and validated a PVP statement developed by researchers based on review of qualitative data from deliberations and quantitative data from surveys.

Results: Participants affirmed the PVP statement reflected their small group deliberations and their individual views. Most indicated that pain relief is critical to deciding which pain relief medicine they would want regardless of expected pain level. Most also identify as critical concerns about substance abuse or misuse, although many believe it unlikely that they will experience these outcomes over the brief prescription timeframe for acute dental pain. Participants identified agency in decision-making, consultation including "better communication" of options, and treatment actions tailored to life circumstances as key values.

Conclusions: Participants preferred nonprescription and nonopioid pain relief options. As expected pain levels increased, more participants expressed willingness to accept opioids, but more also mentioned rescue analgesia as a third outcome critical to decision-making. Online deliberative method provided opportunities for obtaining informed perspectives. Guideline developers and policymakers may find online deliberations useful for eliciting PVP related to health outcomes.

Knowledge transfer statement: Study results informed the US Food and Drug Administration-funded clinical practice guideline on the management of acute dental pain. Findings may be a resource for clinicians in decision-making conversations with patients regarding expectations for pain relief and positive and negative outcomes of differing pain relief medications. Further research should pursue applicability of online deliberative engagement as a method to elicit patient values and preferences.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过在线讨论激发患者对急性牙科疼痛治疗的价值观和偏好。
导言:在制定临床实践指南(CPG)时,患者的价值观和偏好(PVP)是专家小组成员综合的多种信息来源之一。患者和公众参与(PPI)对于了解患者的价值观和偏好至关重要;然而,目前还缺乏让患者参与制定临床实践指南(CPG)的方法。对于需要人们考虑道德、价值观和相互竞争的观点的复杂主题,慎重参与能有效获取公众意见:目的:了解患者对口腔止痛药治疗牙痛、简单拔牙和外科拔牙引起的急性牙科疼痛的全面理解,并考虑相关结果,包括理想的和不理想的结果:多阶段参与,包括 2 项电子调查和 90 分钟的在线小组讨论参与。经历过急性牙痛的成年人根据预期疼痛强度对 3 种假设情景进行讨论,完成讨论后调查,并验证研究人员根据讨论中的定性数据和调查中的定量数据制定的 PVP 声明:结果:参与者肯定了 PVP 声明反映了他们的小组讨论和个人观点。大多数人表示,无论预期疼痛程度如何,止痛是决定他们想要哪种止痛药的关键。大多数人还认为药物滥用或误用是关键问题,尽管许多人认为他们不太可能在急性牙痛的短暂处方时限内经历这些结果。参与者认为,决策权、咨询(包括 "更好地沟通 "各种选择)以及根据生活环境采取治疗行动是关键的价值观:结论:参与者倾向于选择非处方和非阿片类止痛药。随着预期疼痛程度的增加,越来越多的参与者表示愿意接受阿片类药物,但也有更多的人提到抢救性镇痛是对决策至关重要的第三个结果。在线审议方法为获得知情观点提供了机会。指南制定者和政策制定者可能会发现,在线商议有助于征求与健康结果相关的个人志愿:研究结果为美国食品和药物管理局资助的急性牙痛管理临床实践指南提供了参考。研究结果可作为临床医生在与患者进行决策对话时的参考资料,帮助他们了解患者对止痛的期望以及不同止痛药物的积极和消极结果。进一步的研究应探讨在线商议参与作为激发患者价值观和偏好的一种方法的适用性。
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 去求助
来源期刊
JDR Clinical & Translational Research
JDR Clinical & Translational Research DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: JDR Clinical & Translational Research seeks to publish the highest quality research articles on clinical and translational research including all of the dental specialties and implantology. Examples include behavioral sciences, cariology, oral & pharyngeal cancer, disease diagnostics, evidence based health care delivery, human genetics, health services research, periodontal diseases, oral medicine, radiology, and pathology. The JDR Clinical & Translational Research expands on its research content by including high-impact health care and global oral health policy statements and systematic reviews of clinical concepts affecting clinical practice. Unique to the JDR Clinical & Translational Research are advances in clinical and translational medicine articles created to focus on research with an immediate potential to affect clinical therapy outcomes.
期刊最新文献
"It's Everybody's and It's Nobody's Responsibility": Stakeholder Perspectives on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Equity at the Nexus of Chronic Kidney Disease and Oral Health. Behavior Change Techniques to Reduce Sugars Intake by Adolescents: A Systematic Review. Altered Surrogate Markers of Inflammation in Perinatal HIV-Exposed Children with Caries. Benefits of Dental Scaling and Polishing in Adults: A Rapid Review and Evidence Synthesis. Effect Modification by Obesity on Nonsurgical Periodontal Treatment.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1