Cargando…

Opportunities and challenges for the inclusion of patient preferences in the medical product life cycle: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: The inclusion of patient preferences (PP) in the medical product life cycle is a topic of growing interest to stakeholders such as academics, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies, reimbursement agencies, industry, patients, physicians and regulators. This review aimed to understand...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Janssens, Rosanne, Huys, Isabelle, van Overbeeke, Eline, Whichello, Chiara, Harding, Sarah, Kübler, Jürgen, Juhaeri, Juhaeri, Ciaglia, Antonio, Simoens, Steven, Stevens, Hilde, Smith, Meredith, Levitan, Bennett, Cleemput, Irina, de Bekker-Grob, Esther, Veldwijk, Jorien
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6778383/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31585538
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-019-0875-z
_version_ 1783456754200215552
author Janssens, Rosanne
Huys, Isabelle
van Overbeeke, Eline
Whichello, Chiara
Harding, Sarah
Kübler, Jürgen
Juhaeri, Juhaeri
Ciaglia, Antonio
Simoens, Steven
Stevens, Hilde
Smith, Meredith
Levitan, Bennett
Cleemput, Irina
de Bekker-Grob, Esther
Veldwijk, Jorien
author_facet Janssens, Rosanne
Huys, Isabelle
van Overbeeke, Eline
Whichello, Chiara
Harding, Sarah
Kübler, Jürgen
Juhaeri, Juhaeri
Ciaglia, Antonio
Simoens, Steven
Stevens, Hilde
Smith, Meredith
Levitan, Bennett
Cleemput, Irina
de Bekker-Grob, Esther
Veldwijk, Jorien
author_sort Janssens, Rosanne
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The inclusion of patient preferences (PP) in the medical product life cycle is a topic of growing interest to stakeholders such as academics, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies, reimbursement agencies, industry, patients, physicians and regulators. This review aimed to understand the potential roles, reasons for using PP and the expectations, concerns and requirements associated with PP in industry processes, regulatory benefit-risk assessment (BRA) and marketing authorization (MA), and HTA and reimbursement decision-making. METHODS: A systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature published between January 2011 and March 2018 was performed. Consulted databases were EconLit, Embase, Guidelines International Network, PsycINFO and PubMed. A two-step strategy was used to select literature. Literature was analyzed using NVivo (QSR international). RESULTS: From 1015 initially identified documents, 72 were included. Most were written from an academic perspective (61%) and focused on PP in BRA/MA and/or HTA/reimbursement (73%). Using PP to improve understanding of patients’ valuations of treatment outcomes, patients’ benefit-risk trade-offs and preference heterogeneity were roles identified in all three decision-making contexts. Reasons for using PP relate to the unique insights and position of patients and the positive effect of including PP on the quality of the decision-making process. Concerns shared across decision-making contexts included methodological questions concerning the validity, reliability and cognitive burden of preference methods. In order to use PP, general, operational and quality requirements were identified, including recognition of the importance of PP and ensuring patient understanding in PP studies. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the array of opportunities and added value of using PP throughout the different steps of the MPLC identified in this review, their inclusion in decision-making is hampered by methodological challenges and lack of specific guidance on how to tackle these challenges when undertaking PP studies. To support the development of such guidance, more best practice PP studies and PP studies investigating the methodological issues identified in this review are critically needed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12911-019-0875-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6778383
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67783832019-10-07 Opportunities and challenges for the inclusion of patient preferences in the medical product life cycle: a systematic review Janssens, Rosanne Huys, Isabelle van Overbeeke, Eline Whichello, Chiara Harding, Sarah Kübler, Jürgen Juhaeri, Juhaeri Ciaglia, Antonio Simoens, Steven Stevens, Hilde Smith, Meredith Levitan, Bennett Cleemput, Irina de Bekker-Grob, Esther Veldwijk, Jorien BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research Article BACKGROUND: The inclusion of patient preferences (PP) in the medical product life cycle is a topic of growing interest to stakeholders such as academics, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies, reimbursement agencies, industry, patients, physicians and regulators. This review aimed to understand the potential roles, reasons for using PP and the expectations, concerns and requirements associated with PP in industry processes, regulatory benefit-risk assessment (BRA) and marketing authorization (MA), and HTA and reimbursement decision-making. METHODS: A systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature published between January 2011 and March 2018 was performed. Consulted databases were EconLit, Embase, Guidelines International Network, PsycINFO and PubMed. A two-step strategy was used to select literature. Literature was analyzed using NVivo (QSR international). RESULTS: From 1015 initially identified documents, 72 were included. Most were written from an academic perspective (61%) and focused on PP in BRA/MA and/or HTA/reimbursement (73%). Using PP to improve understanding of patients’ valuations of treatment outcomes, patients’ benefit-risk trade-offs and preference heterogeneity were roles identified in all three decision-making contexts. Reasons for using PP relate to the unique insights and position of patients and the positive effect of including PP on the quality of the decision-making process. Concerns shared across decision-making contexts included methodological questions concerning the validity, reliability and cognitive burden of preference methods. In order to use PP, general, operational and quality requirements were identified, including recognition of the importance of PP and ensuring patient understanding in PP studies. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the array of opportunities and added value of using PP throughout the different steps of the MPLC identified in this review, their inclusion in decision-making is hampered by methodological challenges and lack of specific guidance on how to tackle these challenges when undertaking PP studies. To support the development of such guidance, more best practice PP studies and PP studies investigating the methodological issues identified in this review are critically needed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12911-019-0875-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-10-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6778383/ /pubmed/31585538 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-019-0875-z Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Janssens, Rosanne
Huys, Isabelle
van Overbeeke, Eline
Whichello, Chiara
Harding, Sarah
Kübler, Jürgen
Juhaeri, Juhaeri
Ciaglia, Antonio
Simoens, Steven
Stevens, Hilde
Smith, Meredith
Levitan, Bennett
Cleemput, Irina
de Bekker-Grob, Esther
Veldwijk, Jorien
Opportunities and challenges for the inclusion of patient preferences in the medical product life cycle: a systematic review
title Opportunities and challenges for the inclusion of patient preferences in the medical product life cycle: a systematic review
title_full Opportunities and challenges for the inclusion of patient preferences in the medical product life cycle: a systematic review
title_fullStr Opportunities and challenges for the inclusion of patient preferences in the medical product life cycle: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Opportunities and challenges for the inclusion of patient preferences in the medical product life cycle: a systematic review
title_short Opportunities and challenges for the inclusion of patient preferences in the medical product life cycle: a systematic review
title_sort opportunities and challenges for the inclusion of patient preferences in the medical product life cycle: a systematic review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6778383/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31585538
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-019-0875-z
work_keys_str_mv AT janssensrosanne opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT huysisabelle opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT vanoverbeekeeline opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT whichellochiara opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT hardingsarah opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT kublerjurgen opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT juhaerijuhaeri opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT ciagliaantonio opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT simoenssteven opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT stevenshilde opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT smithmeredith opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT levitanbennett opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT cleemputirina opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT debekkergrobesther opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview
AT veldwijkjorien opportunitiesandchallengesfortheinclusionofpatientpreferencesinthemedicalproductlifecycleasystematicreview