比较在决策点识别上市后患者偏好的方法:考虑使用脊髓刺激器设备的慢性疼痛患者的观点。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Patient preference and adherence Pub Date : 2024-06-25 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/PPA.S431378
Elizabeth H Golembiewski, Montserrat Leon-Garcia, Derek Loy Gravholt, Juan P Brito, Erica S Spatz, Markus A Bendel, Victor M Montori, Andrea P Maraboto, Sandra A Hartasanchez, Ian G Hargraves
{"title":"比较在决策点识别上市后患者偏好的方法:考虑使用脊髓刺激器设备的慢性疼痛患者的观点。","authors":"Elizabeth H Golembiewski, Montserrat Leon-Garcia, Derek Loy Gravholt, Juan P Brito, Erica S Spatz, Markus A Bendel, Victor M Montori, Andrea P Maraboto, Sandra A Hartasanchez, Ian G Hargraves","doi":"10.2147/PPA.S431378","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare three methods for identifying patient preferences (MIPPs) at the point of decision-making: analysis of video-recorded patient-clinician encounters, post-encounter interviews, and post-encounter surveys.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>For the decision of whether to use a spinal cord stimulator device (SCS), a video coding scheme, interview guide, and patient survey were iteratively developed with 30 SCS decision-making encounters in a tertiary academic medical center pain clinic. Burke's grammar of motives was used to classify the attributed source or justification for a potential preference for each preference block. To compare the MIPPs, 13 patients' encounters with their clinician were video recorded and subsequently analyzed by 4 coders using the final video coding scheme. Six of these patients were interviewed, and 7 surveyed, immediately following their encounters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For videos, an average of 66 (range 33-106) sets of utterances potentially indicating a patient preference (a preference block), surveys 33 (range 32-34), and interviews 25 (range 18-30) were identified. Thirty-eight unique themes (75 subthemes), each a preference topic, were identified from videos, surveys 19 themes (12 subthemes), and interviews 39 themes (54 subthemes). The proportion of preference blocks that were judged as expressing a preference that was clearly important to the patient or affected their decision was highest for interviews (72.8%), surveys (68.0%), and videos (27.0%). Videos mostly attributed preferences to the patient's situation (scene) (65%); interviews, the act of receiving or living with SCS (43%); surveys, the purpose of SCS (40%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>MIPPs vary in the type of preferences identified and the clarity of expressed preferences in their data sets. The choice of which MIPP to use depends on projects' goals and resources, recognizing that the choice of MIPP may affect which preferences are found.</p>","PeriodicalId":19972,"journal":{"name":"Patient preference and adherence","volume":"18 ","pages":"1325-1344"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11215661/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Methods for Identifying Post-Market Patient Preferences at the Point of Decision-Making: Insights from Patients with Chronic Pain Considering a Spinal Cord Stimulator Device.\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth H Golembiewski, Montserrat Leon-Garcia, Derek Loy Gravholt, Juan P Brito, Erica S Spatz, Markus A Bendel, Victor M Montori, Andrea P Maraboto, Sandra A Hartasanchez, Ian G Hargraves\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/PPA.S431378\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare three methods for identifying patient preferences (MIPPs) at the point of decision-making: analysis of video-recorded patient-clinician encounters, post-encounter interviews, and post-encounter surveys.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>For the decision of whether to use a spinal cord stimulator device (SCS), a video coding scheme, interview guide, and patient survey were iteratively developed with 30 SCS decision-making encounters in a tertiary academic medical center pain clinic. Burke's grammar of motives was used to classify the attributed source or justification for a potential preference for each preference block. To compare the MIPPs, 13 patients' encounters with their clinician were video recorded and subsequently analyzed by 4 coders using the final video coding scheme. Six of these patients were interviewed, and 7 surveyed, immediately following their encounters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For videos, an average of 66 (range 33-106) sets of utterances potentially indicating a patient preference (a preference block), surveys 33 (range 32-34), and interviews 25 (range 18-30) were identified. Thirty-eight unique themes (75 subthemes), each a preference topic, were identified from videos, surveys 19 themes (12 subthemes), and interviews 39 themes (54 subthemes). The proportion of preference blocks that were judged as expressing a preference that was clearly important to the patient or affected their decision was highest for interviews (72.8%), surveys (68.0%), and videos (27.0%). Videos mostly attributed preferences to the patient's situation (scene) (65%); interviews, the act of receiving or living with SCS (43%); surveys, the purpose of SCS (40%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>MIPPs vary in the type of preferences identified and the clarity of expressed preferences in their data sets. The choice of which MIPP to use depends on projects' goals and resources, recognizing that the choice of MIPP may affect which preferences are found.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19972,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patient preference and adherence\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"1325-1344\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11215661/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patient preference and adherence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S431378\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient preference and adherence","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S431378","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较在决策时确定患者偏好(MIPPs)的三种方法:分析患者与医生的视频录像、会后访谈和会后调查:针对是否使用脊髓刺激器(SCS)的决策,在一家三级学术医疗中心疼痛诊所的 30 次脊髓刺激器决策过程中,反复制定了视频编码方案、访谈指南和患者调查。伯克动机语法用于对每个偏好区块潜在偏好的归因来源或理由进行分类。为了比较 MIPPs,对 13 名患者与临床医生的会面进行了录像,随后由 4 名编码员使用最终的视频编码方案进行分析。其中 6 名患者在就诊后立即接受了访谈,7 名患者接受了调查:视频中平均有 66 组(33-106 不等)语句可能表明患者的偏好(偏好区块),调查中平均有 33 组(32-34 不等)语句可能表明患者的偏好,访谈中平均有 25 组(18-30 不等)语句可能表明患者的偏好。从视频中确定了 38 个独特的主题(75 个子主题),每个主题都是一个偏好主题,调查中确定了 19 个主题(12 个子主题),访谈中确定了 39 个主题(54 个子主题)。被判定为表达了对患者明显重要或影响其决定的偏好的偏好块比例最高的是访谈(72.8%)、调查(68.0%)和视频(27.0%)。视频大多将偏好归因于患者的情况(场景)(65%);访谈归因于接受 SCS 或与 SCS 共同生活的行为(43%);调查归因于 SCS 的目的(40%):结论:MIPP 在其数据集中确定的偏好类型和表达的偏好清晰度方面各不相同。选择使用哪种 MIPP 取决于项目的目标和资源,因为 MIPP 的选择可能会影响所发现的偏好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparing Methods for Identifying Post-Market Patient Preferences at the Point of Decision-Making: Insights from Patients with Chronic Pain Considering a Spinal Cord Stimulator Device.

Purpose: To compare three methods for identifying patient preferences (MIPPs) at the point of decision-making: analysis of video-recorded patient-clinician encounters, post-encounter interviews, and post-encounter surveys.

Patients and methods: For the decision of whether to use a spinal cord stimulator device (SCS), a video coding scheme, interview guide, and patient survey were iteratively developed with 30 SCS decision-making encounters in a tertiary academic medical center pain clinic. Burke's grammar of motives was used to classify the attributed source or justification for a potential preference for each preference block. To compare the MIPPs, 13 patients' encounters with their clinician were video recorded and subsequently analyzed by 4 coders using the final video coding scheme. Six of these patients were interviewed, and 7 surveyed, immediately following their encounters.

Results: For videos, an average of 66 (range 33-106) sets of utterances potentially indicating a patient preference (a preference block), surveys 33 (range 32-34), and interviews 25 (range 18-30) were identified. Thirty-eight unique themes (75 subthemes), each a preference topic, were identified from videos, surveys 19 themes (12 subthemes), and interviews 39 themes (54 subthemes). The proportion of preference blocks that were judged as expressing a preference that was clearly important to the patient or affected their decision was highest for interviews (72.8%), surveys (68.0%), and videos (27.0%). Videos mostly attributed preferences to the patient's situation (scene) (65%); interviews, the act of receiving or living with SCS (43%); surveys, the purpose of SCS (40%).

Conclusion: MIPPs vary in the type of preferences identified and the clarity of expressed preferences in their data sets. The choice of which MIPP to use depends on projects' goals and resources, recognizing that the choice of MIPP may affect which preferences are found.

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 preference and adherence
Patient preference and adherence MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.50%
发文量
354
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Patient Preference and Adherence is an international, peer reviewed, open access journal that focuses on the growing importance of patient preference and adherence throughout the therapeutic continuum. The journal is characterized by the rapid reporting of reviews, original research, modeling and clinical studies across all therapeutic areas. Patient satisfaction, acceptability, quality of life, compliance, persistence and their role in developing new therapeutic modalities and compounds to optimize clinical outcomes for existing disease states are major areas of interest for the journal. As of 1st April 2019, Patient Preference and Adherence will no longer consider meta-analyses for publication.
期刊最新文献
Enhancing Adherence to Health Behaviors Research: Reflections on Current Methods and Future Directions [Letter]. Public Perceptions of Surgeon Attire in Saudi Arabia. Associations of Social Psychological Factors and OHRQoL in Periodontitis Patients: A Structural Equation Modeling Study. Comparing Patient Satisfaction with Automated Drug Dispensing System and Traditional Drug Dispensing System: A Cross-Sectional Study. Development and Testing of a Multi-Component Intervention to Improve Medication Literacy in Glaucoma Patients.
×
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