Cargando…

Assessing Patient Interest in Individualized Preventive Care Recommendations

Background. Few Americans obtain all 41 guideline-recommended preventive services for nonpregnant adults. We assessed patient interest in prioritizing their preventive care needs. Methods. We conducted a mixed-methods study, with 4 focus groups (N = 28) at a single institution and a nationwide surve...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Taksler, Glen B., Beth Mercer, Mary, Fagerlin, Angela, Rothberg, Michael B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6540511/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31192307
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468319850803
_version_ 1783422635568267264
author Taksler, Glen B.
Beth Mercer, Mary
Fagerlin, Angela
Rothberg, Michael B.
author_facet Taksler, Glen B.
Beth Mercer, Mary
Fagerlin, Angela
Rothberg, Michael B.
author_sort Taksler, Glen B.
collection PubMed
description Background. Few Americans obtain all 41 guideline-recommended preventive services for nonpregnant adults. We assessed patient interest in prioritizing their preventive care needs. Methods. We conducted a mixed-methods study, with 4 focus groups (N = 28) at a single institution and a nationwide survey (N = 2,103). Participants were middle-aged and older adults with preventive care needs. We obtained reactions to written materials describing the magnitude of benefit from major preventive services, including both absolute and relative benefits. Recommendations were individualized for patient risk factors (“individualized preventive care recommendations”). Focus groups assessed patient interest, how patients would want to discuss individualized recommendations with their providers, and potential for individualized recommendations to influence patient decision making. Survey content was based on focus groups and analyzed with logistic regression. Results. Patients expressed strong interest in individualized recommendations. Among survey respondents, an adjusted 88.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 86.7% to 89.7%) found individualized recommendations very easy to understand, 77.2% (95% CI = 75.3% to 79.1%) considered them very useful, and 64.9% (95% CI = 62.8% to 67.0%) highly trustworthy (each ≥6/7 on Likert scale). Three quarters of participants wanted to receive their own individualized recommendations in upcoming primary care visits (adjusted proportion = 77.5%, 95% CI = 75.6% to 79.4%). Both focus group and survey participants supported shared decision making and reported that individualized recommendations would improve motivation to obtain preventive care. Half of survey respondents reported that they would be much more likely to visit their doctor if they knew individualized recommendations would be discussed, compared with 4.2% who would not be more likely to visit their doctor. Survey respondents already prioritized preventive services, stating they were most likely to choose quick/easy preventive services and least likely to choose expensive preventive services (adjusted proportions, 63.8% and 8.5%, respectively). Results were consistent in sensitivity analyses. Conclusions. Individualized preventive care recommendations are likely to be well received in primary care and might motivate patients to improve adherence to evidence-based care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6540511
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65405112019-06-12 Assessing Patient Interest in Individualized Preventive Care Recommendations Taksler, Glen B. Beth Mercer, Mary Fagerlin, Angela Rothberg, Michael B. MDM Policy Pract Article Background. Few Americans obtain all 41 guideline-recommended preventive services for nonpregnant adults. We assessed patient interest in prioritizing their preventive care needs. Methods. We conducted a mixed-methods study, with 4 focus groups (N = 28) at a single institution and a nationwide survey (N = 2,103). Participants were middle-aged and older adults with preventive care needs. We obtained reactions to written materials describing the magnitude of benefit from major preventive services, including both absolute and relative benefits. Recommendations were individualized for patient risk factors (“individualized preventive care recommendations”). Focus groups assessed patient interest, how patients would want to discuss individualized recommendations with their providers, and potential for individualized recommendations to influence patient decision making. Survey content was based on focus groups and analyzed with logistic regression. Results. Patients expressed strong interest in individualized recommendations. Among survey respondents, an adjusted 88.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 86.7% to 89.7%) found individualized recommendations very easy to understand, 77.2% (95% CI = 75.3% to 79.1%) considered them very useful, and 64.9% (95% CI = 62.8% to 67.0%) highly trustworthy (each ≥6/7 on Likert scale). Three quarters of participants wanted to receive their own individualized recommendations in upcoming primary care visits (adjusted proportion = 77.5%, 95% CI = 75.6% to 79.4%). Both focus group and survey participants supported shared decision making and reported that individualized recommendations would improve motivation to obtain preventive care. Half of survey respondents reported that they would be much more likely to visit their doctor if they knew individualized recommendations would be discussed, compared with 4.2% who would not be more likely to visit their doctor. Survey respondents already prioritized preventive services, stating they were most likely to choose quick/easy preventive services and least likely to choose expensive preventive services (adjusted proportions, 63.8% and 8.5%, respectively). Results were consistent in sensitivity analyses. Conclusions. Individualized preventive care recommendations are likely to be well received in primary care and might motivate patients to improve adherence to evidence-based care. SAGE Publications 2019-05-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6540511/ /pubmed/31192307 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468319850803 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Article
Taksler, Glen B.
Beth Mercer, Mary
Fagerlin, Angela
Rothberg, Michael B.
Assessing Patient Interest in Individualized Preventive Care Recommendations
title Assessing Patient Interest in Individualized Preventive Care Recommendations
title_full Assessing Patient Interest in Individualized Preventive Care Recommendations
title_fullStr Assessing Patient Interest in Individualized Preventive Care Recommendations
title_full_unstemmed Assessing Patient Interest in Individualized Preventive Care Recommendations
title_short Assessing Patient Interest in Individualized Preventive Care Recommendations
title_sort assessing patient interest in individualized preventive care recommendations
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6540511/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31192307
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468319850803
work_keys_str_mv AT takslerglenb assessingpatientinterestinindividualizedpreventivecarerecommendations
AT bethmercermary assessingpatientinterestinindividualizedpreventivecarerecommendations
AT fagerlinangela assessingpatientinterestinindividualizedpreventivecarerecommendations
AT rothbergmichaelb assessingpatientinterestinindividualizedpreventivecarerecommendations