Cargando…

Prosthesis preferences for those with upper limb loss: Discrete choice study of PULLTY® for use in regulatory decisions

INTRODUCTION: The patient’s voice in shared decision-making has progressed from physician’s office to regulatory decision-making for medical devices with FDA’s Patient Preference Initiative. A discrete-choice preference measure for upper limb prosthetic devices was developed to investigate patient’s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wilson, Leslie, Dohan, Dan, Garibaldi, Matthew, Szeto, David, Timmerman, Molly, Matheny, Johnny
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9869218/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36698551
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20556683231152418
_version_ 1784876721798905856
author Wilson, Leslie
Dohan, Dan
Garibaldi, Matthew
Szeto, David
Timmerman, Molly
Matheny, Johnny
author_facet Wilson, Leslie
Dohan, Dan
Garibaldi, Matthew
Szeto, David
Timmerman, Molly
Matheny, Johnny
author_sort Wilson, Leslie
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The patient’s voice in shared decision-making has progressed from physician’s office to regulatory decision-making for medical devices with FDA’s Patient Preference Initiative. A discrete-choice preference measure for upper limb prosthetic devices was developed to investigate patient’s risk/benefit preference choices for regulatory decision making. METHODS: Rapid ethnographic procedures were used to design a discrete-choice measure describing risk and benefits of osseointegration with myoelectric control and test in a pilot preference study in adults with upper limb loss. Primary outcome is utility of each choice based conjoint (CBC) attribute using mixed-effects regression. Utilities with and without video, and between genders were compared. RESULTS: Strongest negative preference was for avoiding infection risk (B = −1.77, p < 0.001) and chance of daily pain (B = −1.22, p, 0.001). Strongest positive preference was for attaining complete independence when cooking dinner (B = 1.62, p < 0.001) and smooth grip patterns at all levels (B = 1.62, B = 1.28, B = 1.26, p < 0.001). Trade-offs showed a 1% increase in risk of serious/treatable infection resulted in a 1.77 decrease in relative preference. There were gender differences, and where video was used, preferences were stronger. CONCLUSIONS: Strongest preferences were for attributes of functionality and independence versus connectedness and sensation but showed willingness to make risk-benefit trade-offs. Findings provide valuable information for regulatory benefit-risk decisions for prosthetic device innovations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is not a clinical trial reporting results of a health care intervention so is not registered.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9869218
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98692182023-01-24 Prosthesis preferences for those with upper limb loss: Discrete choice study of PULLTY® for use in regulatory decisions Wilson, Leslie Dohan, Dan Garibaldi, Matthew Szeto, David Timmerman, Molly Matheny, Johnny J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng Original Manuscript INTRODUCTION: The patient’s voice in shared decision-making has progressed from physician’s office to regulatory decision-making for medical devices with FDA’s Patient Preference Initiative. A discrete-choice preference measure for upper limb prosthetic devices was developed to investigate patient’s risk/benefit preference choices for regulatory decision making. METHODS: Rapid ethnographic procedures were used to design a discrete-choice measure describing risk and benefits of osseointegration with myoelectric control and test in a pilot preference study in adults with upper limb loss. Primary outcome is utility of each choice based conjoint (CBC) attribute using mixed-effects regression. Utilities with and without video, and between genders were compared. RESULTS: Strongest negative preference was for avoiding infection risk (B = −1.77, p < 0.001) and chance of daily pain (B = −1.22, p, 0.001). Strongest positive preference was for attaining complete independence when cooking dinner (B = 1.62, p < 0.001) and smooth grip patterns at all levels (B = 1.62, B = 1.28, B = 1.26, p < 0.001). Trade-offs showed a 1% increase in risk of serious/treatable infection resulted in a 1.77 decrease in relative preference. There were gender differences, and where video was used, preferences were stronger. CONCLUSIONS: Strongest preferences were for attributes of functionality and independence versus connectedness and sensation but showed willingness to make risk-benefit trade-offs. Findings provide valuable information for regulatory benefit-risk decisions for prosthetic device innovations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is not a clinical trial reporting results of a health care intervention so is not registered. SAGE Publications 2023-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9869218/ /pubmed/36698551 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20556683231152418 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://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 Original Manuscript
Wilson, Leslie
Dohan, Dan
Garibaldi, Matthew
Szeto, David
Timmerman, Molly
Matheny, Johnny
Prosthesis preferences for those with upper limb loss: Discrete choice study of PULLTY® for use in regulatory decisions
title Prosthesis preferences for those with upper limb loss: Discrete choice study of PULLTY® for use in regulatory decisions
title_full Prosthesis preferences for those with upper limb loss: Discrete choice study of PULLTY® for use in regulatory decisions
title_fullStr Prosthesis preferences for those with upper limb loss: Discrete choice study of PULLTY® for use in regulatory decisions
title_full_unstemmed Prosthesis preferences for those with upper limb loss: Discrete choice study of PULLTY® for use in regulatory decisions
title_short Prosthesis preferences for those with upper limb loss: Discrete choice study of PULLTY® for use in regulatory decisions
title_sort prosthesis preferences for those with upper limb loss: discrete choice study of pullty® for use in regulatory decisions
topic Original Manuscript
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9869218/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36698551
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20556683231152418
work_keys_str_mv AT wilsonleslie prosthesispreferencesforthosewithupperlimblossdiscretechoicestudyofpulltyforuseinregulatorydecisions
AT dohandan prosthesispreferencesforthosewithupperlimblossdiscretechoicestudyofpulltyforuseinregulatorydecisions
AT garibaldimatthew prosthesispreferencesforthosewithupperlimblossdiscretechoicestudyofpulltyforuseinregulatorydecisions
AT szetodavid prosthesispreferencesforthosewithupperlimblossdiscretechoicestudyofpulltyforuseinregulatorydecisions
AT timmermanmolly prosthesispreferencesforthosewithupperlimblossdiscretechoicestudyofpulltyforuseinregulatorydecisions
AT mathenyjohnny prosthesispreferencesforthosewithupperlimblossdiscretechoicestudyofpulltyforuseinregulatorydecisions