Cargando…

Using a Discrete-Choice Experiment in a Decision Aid to Nudge Patients Towards Value-Concordant Treatment Choices in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Proof-of-Concept Study

PURPOSE: To evaluate, in a proof-of-concept study, a decision aid that incorporates hypothetical choices in the form of a discrete-choice experiment (DCE), to help patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) understand their values and nudge them towards a value-centric decision between methotrexa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hazlewood, Glen S, Marshall, Deborah A, Barber, Claire E H, Li, Linda C, Barnabe, Cheryl, Bykerk, Vivian, Tugwell, Peter, Hull, Pauline M, Bansback, Nick
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7244245/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32546977
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S221897
_version_ 1783537541842993152
author Hazlewood, Glen S
Marshall, Deborah A
Barber, Claire E H
Li, Linda C
Barnabe, Cheryl
Bykerk, Vivian
Tugwell, Peter
Hull, Pauline M
Bansback, Nick
author_facet Hazlewood, Glen S
Marshall, Deborah A
Barber, Claire E H
Li, Linda C
Barnabe, Cheryl
Bykerk, Vivian
Tugwell, Peter
Hull, Pauline M
Bansback, Nick
author_sort Hazlewood, Glen S
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To evaluate, in a proof-of-concept study, a decision aid that incorporates hypothetical choices in the form of a discrete-choice experiment (DCE), to help patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) understand their values and nudge them towards a value-centric decision between methotrexate and triple therapy (a combination of methotrexate, sulphasalazine and hydroxychloroquine). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the decision aid, patients completed a series of 6 DCE choice tasks. Based on the patient’s pattern of responses, we calculated his/her probability of choosing each treatment, using data from a prior DCE. Following pilot testing, we conducted a cross-sectional study to determine the agreement between the predicted and final stated preference, as a measure of value concordance. Secondary outcomes including time to completion and usability were also evaluated. RESULTS: Pilot testing was completed with 10 patients and adjustments were made. We then recruited 29 patients to complete the survey: median age 57, 55% female. The patients were all taking treatment and had well-controlled disease. The predicted treatment agreed with the final treatment chosen by the patient 21/29 times (72%), similar to the expected agreement from the mean of the predicted probabilities (68%). Triple therapy was the predicted treatment 24/29 times (83%) and chosen 20/29 (69%) times. Half of the patients (51%) agreed that completing the choice questions helped them to understand their preferences (38% neutral, 10% disagreed). The tool took an average of 15 minutes to complete, and median usability scores were 55 (system usability scale) indicating “OK” usability. CONCLUSION: Using a DCE as a value-clarification task within a decision aid is feasible, with promising potential to help nudge patients towards a value-centric decision. Usability testing suggests further modifications are needed prior to implementation, perhaps by having the DCE exercises as an “add-on” to a simpler decision aid.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7244245
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72442452020-06-15 Using a Discrete-Choice Experiment in a Decision Aid to Nudge Patients Towards Value-Concordant Treatment Choices in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Proof-of-Concept Study Hazlewood, Glen S Marshall, Deborah A Barber, Claire E H Li, Linda C Barnabe, Cheryl Bykerk, Vivian Tugwell, Peter Hull, Pauline M Bansback, Nick Patient Prefer Adherence Original Research PURPOSE: To evaluate, in a proof-of-concept study, a decision aid that incorporates hypothetical choices in the form of a discrete-choice experiment (DCE), to help patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) understand their values and nudge them towards a value-centric decision between methotrexate and triple therapy (a combination of methotrexate, sulphasalazine and hydroxychloroquine). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the decision aid, patients completed a series of 6 DCE choice tasks. Based on the patient’s pattern of responses, we calculated his/her probability of choosing each treatment, using data from a prior DCE. Following pilot testing, we conducted a cross-sectional study to determine the agreement between the predicted and final stated preference, as a measure of value concordance. Secondary outcomes including time to completion and usability were also evaluated. RESULTS: Pilot testing was completed with 10 patients and adjustments were made. We then recruited 29 patients to complete the survey: median age 57, 55% female. The patients were all taking treatment and had well-controlled disease. The predicted treatment agreed with the final treatment chosen by the patient 21/29 times (72%), similar to the expected agreement from the mean of the predicted probabilities (68%). Triple therapy was the predicted treatment 24/29 times (83%) and chosen 20/29 (69%) times. Half of the patients (51%) agreed that completing the choice questions helped them to understand their preferences (38% neutral, 10% disagreed). The tool took an average of 15 minutes to complete, and median usability scores were 55 (system usability scale) indicating “OK” usability. CONCLUSION: Using a DCE as a value-clarification task within a decision aid is feasible, with promising potential to help nudge patients towards a value-centric decision. Usability testing suggests further modifications are needed prior to implementation, perhaps by having the DCE exercises as an “add-on” to a simpler decision aid. Dove 2020-05-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7244245/ /pubmed/32546977 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S221897 Text en © 2020 Hazlewood et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Hazlewood, Glen S
Marshall, Deborah A
Barber, Claire E H
Li, Linda C
Barnabe, Cheryl
Bykerk, Vivian
Tugwell, Peter
Hull, Pauline M
Bansback, Nick
Using a Discrete-Choice Experiment in a Decision Aid to Nudge Patients Towards Value-Concordant Treatment Choices in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Proof-of-Concept Study
title Using a Discrete-Choice Experiment in a Decision Aid to Nudge Patients Towards Value-Concordant Treatment Choices in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Proof-of-Concept Study
title_full Using a Discrete-Choice Experiment in a Decision Aid to Nudge Patients Towards Value-Concordant Treatment Choices in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Proof-of-Concept Study
title_fullStr Using a Discrete-Choice Experiment in a Decision Aid to Nudge Patients Towards Value-Concordant Treatment Choices in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Proof-of-Concept Study
title_full_unstemmed Using a Discrete-Choice Experiment in a Decision Aid to Nudge Patients Towards Value-Concordant Treatment Choices in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Proof-of-Concept Study
title_short Using a Discrete-Choice Experiment in a Decision Aid to Nudge Patients Towards Value-Concordant Treatment Choices in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Proof-of-Concept Study
title_sort using a discrete-choice experiment in a decision aid to nudge patients towards value-concordant treatment choices in rheumatoid arthritis: a proof-of-concept study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7244245/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32546977
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S221897
work_keys_str_mv AT hazlewoodglens usingadiscretechoiceexperimentinadecisionaidtonudgepatientstowardsvalueconcordanttreatmentchoicesinrheumatoidarthritisaproofofconceptstudy
AT marshalldeboraha usingadiscretechoiceexperimentinadecisionaidtonudgepatientstowardsvalueconcordanttreatmentchoicesinrheumatoidarthritisaproofofconceptstudy
AT barberclaireeh usingadiscretechoiceexperimentinadecisionaidtonudgepatientstowardsvalueconcordanttreatmentchoicesinrheumatoidarthritisaproofofconceptstudy
AT lilindac usingadiscretechoiceexperimentinadecisionaidtonudgepatientstowardsvalueconcordanttreatmentchoicesinrheumatoidarthritisaproofofconceptstudy
AT barnabecheryl usingadiscretechoiceexperimentinadecisionaidtonudgepatientstowardsvalueconcordanttreatmentchoicesinrheumatoidarthritisaproofofconceptstudy
AT bykerkvivian usingadiscretechoiceexperimentinadecisionaidtonudgepatientstowardsvalueconcordanttreatmentchoicesinrheumatoidarthritisaproofofconceptstudy
AT tugwellpeter usingadiscretechoiceexperimentinadecisionaidtonudgepatientstowardsvalueconcordanttreatmentchoicesinrheumatoidarthritisaproofofconceptstudy
AT hullpaulinem usingadiscretechoiceexperimentinadecisionaidtonudgepatientstowardsvalueconcordanttreatmentchoicesinrheumatoidarthritisaproofofconceptstudy
AT bansbacknick usingadiscretechoiceexperimentinadecisionaidtonudgepatientstowardsvalueconcordanttreatmentchoicesinrheumatoidarthritisaproofofconceptstudy