Cargando…

Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations

Treatments used for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are under investigation for their efficacy to prevent RA in at risk groups. It is therefore important to understand treatment preferences of those at risk. We systematically reviewed quantitative preference studies of drugs to treat, or prevent RA, to in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Simons, Gwenda, Caplan, Joshua, DiSantostefano, Rachael L., Veldwijk, Jorien, Englbrecht, Matthias, Bywall, Karin Schölin, Kihlbom, Ulrik, Raza, Karim, Falahee, Marie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8862509/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35193653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13075-021-02707-4
_version_ 1784655068208824320
author Simons, Gwenda
Caplan, Joshua
DiSantostefano, Rachael L.
Veldwijk, Jorien
Englbrecht, Matthias
Bywall, Karin Schölin
Kihlbom, Ulrik
Raza, Karim
Falahee, Marie
author_facet Simons, Gwenda
Caplan, Joshua
DiSantostefano, Rachael L.
Veldwijk, Jorien
Englbrecht, Matthias
Bywall, Karin Schölin
Kihlbom, Ulrik
Raza, Karim
Falahee, Marie
author_sort Simons, Gwenda
collection PubMed
description Treatments used for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are under investigation for their efficacy to prevent RA in at risk groups. It is therefore important to understand treatment preferences of those at risk. We systematically reviewed quantitative preference studies of drugs to treat, or prevent RA, to inform the design of further studies and trials of RA prevention. Stated preference studies for RA treatment or prevention were identified through a search of five databases. Study characteristics and results were extracted, and the relative importance of different types of treatment attributes was compared across populations. Twenty three studies were included 20 of RA treatments (18 of patients; 2 of the general public) and 3 prevention studies with first-degree relatives (FDRs). Benefits, risks, administration method and cost (when included) were important determinants of treatment choice. A benefit was more important than a risk attribute in half of the studies of RA treatment that included a benefit attribute and 2/3 studies of RA prevention. There was variability in the relative importance of attributes across the few prevention studies. In studies with non-patient participants, attributes describing confidence in treatment effectiveness/safety were more important determinants of choice than in studies with patients. Most preference studies relating to RA are of treatments for established RA. Few studies examine preferences for treatments to prevent RA. Given intense research focus on RA prevention, additional preference studies in this context are needed. Variation in treatment preferences across different populations is not well understood and direct comparisons are needed. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13075-021-02707-4.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8862509
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88625092022-02-23 Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations Simons, Gwenda Caplan, Joshua DiSantostefano, Rachael L. Veldwijk, Jorien Englbrecht, Matthias Bywall, Karin Schölin Kihlbom, Ulrik Raza, Karim Falahee, Marie Arthritis Res Ther Review Treatments used for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are under investigation for their efficacy to prevent RA in at risk groups. It is therefore important to understand treatment preferences of those at risk. We systematically reviewed quantitative preference studies of drugs to treat, or prevent RA, to inform the design of further studies and trials of RA prevention. Stated preference studies for RA treatment or prevention were identified through a search of five databases. Study characteristics and results were extracted, and the relative importance of different types of treatment attributes was compared across populations. Twenty three studies were included 20 of RA treatments (18 of patients; 2 of the general public) and 3 prevention studies with first-degree relatives (FDRs). Benefits, risks, administration method and cost (when included) were important determinants of treatment choice. A benefit was more important than a risk attribute in half of the studies of RA treatment that included a benefit attribute and 2/3 studies of RA prevention. There was variability in the relative importance of attributes across the few prevention studies. In studies with non-patient participants, attributes describing confidence in treatment effectiveness/safety were more important determinants of choice than in studies with patients. Most preference studies relating to RA are of treatments for established RA. Few studies examine preferences for treatments to prevent RA. Given intense research focus on RA prevention, additional preference studies in this context are needed. Variation in treatment preferences across different populations is not well understood and direct comparisons are needed. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13075-021-02707-4. BioMed Central 2022-02-22 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8862509/ /pubmed/35193653 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13075-021-02707-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Review
Simons, Gwenda
Caplan, Joshua
DiSantostefano, Rachael L.
Veldwijk, Jorien
Englbrecht, Matthias
Bywall, Karin Schölin
Kihlbom, Ulrik
Raza, Karim
Falahee, Marie
Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations
title Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations
title_full Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations
title_fullStr Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations
title_full_unstemmed Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations
title_short Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations
title_sort systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8862509/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35193653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13075-021-02707-4
work_keys_str_mv AT simonsgwenda systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations
AT caplanjoshua systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations
AT disantostefanorachaell systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations
AT veldwijkjorien systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations
AT englbrechtmatthias systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations
AT bywallkarinscholin systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations
AT kihlbomulrik systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations
AT razakarim systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations
AT falaheemarie systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations