Whose Preferences Matter? A Patient-Centered Approach for Eliciting Treatment Goals
Authors
Col, Nananda F.Solomon, Andrew J.
Springmann, Vicky
Garbin, Calvin P.
Ionete, Carolina
Pbert, Lori
Alvarez, Enrique
Tierman, Brenda
Hopson, Ashli
Kutz, Christen
Morales, Idanis Berrios
Griffin, Carolyn
Phillips, Glenn
Ngo, Long H.
UMass Chan Affiliations
Department of Medicine, Division of Preventive and Behavioral MedicineUMass Worcester Prevention Research Center
Document Type
Journal ArticlePublication Date
2018-01-01Keywords
clinical decision makingcognitive mapping
hierarchical cluster analysis
multidimensional scaling
multiple sclerosis
nominal group technique
preference assessment
preference sensitive care
shared decision making
values clarification
Behavioral Medicine
Behavior and Behavior Mechanisms
Community Health
Community Health and Preventive Medicine
Health Services Administration
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
BACKGROUND: Patients facing a high-stakes clinical decision are often confronted with an overwhelming array of options. High-quality decisions about treatment should reflect patients' preferences as well as their clinical characteristics. Preference-assessment instruments typically focus on pre-selected clinical outcomes and attributes chosen by the investigator. OBJECTIVE: We sought to develop a patient-centered approach to elicit and compare the treatment goals of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and healthcare providers (HCPs). METHODS: We conducted five nominal group technique (NGT) meetings to elicit and prioritize treatment goals from patients and HCPs. Five to nine participants in each group responded silently to one question about their treatment goals. Responses were shared, consolidated, and ranked to develop a prioritized list for each group. The ranked lists were combined. Goals were rated and sorted into categories. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis were used to derive a visual representation, or cognitive map, of the data and to identify conceptual clusters, reflecting how frequently items were sorted into the same category. RESULTS: Five NGT groups yielded 34 unique patient-generated treatment goals and 31 unique HCP-generated goals. There were differences between patients and HCPs in the goals generated and how they were clustered. Patients' goals tended to focus on the impact of specific symptoms on their day-to-day lives, whereas providers' goals focused on slowing down the course of disease progression. CONCLUSIONS: Differences between the treatment goals of patients and HCPs underscore the limitations of using HCP- or investigator-identified goals. This new adaptation of cognitive mapping is a patient-centered approach that can be used to generate and organize the outcomes and attributes for values clarification exercises while minimizing investigator bias and maximizing relevance to patients.Source
Med Decis Making. 2018 Jan;38(1):44-55. doi: 10.1177/0272989X17724434. Epub 2017 Aug 14. Link to article on publisher's site
DOI
10.1177/0272989X17724434Permanent Link to this Item
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/44651PubMed ID
28806143Related Resources
Rights
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.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).Distribution License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1177/0272989X17724434
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.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).