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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |