Skip to main content
Erschienen in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 4/2017

01.08.2017 | Commentary

Assessment of Individual Patient Preferences to Inform Clinical Practice

verfasst von: Jennifer Anne Whitty, Liana Fraenkel, Christopher S. Saigal, Catharina G. M. Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Dean A. Regier, Deborah A. Marshall

Erschienen in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Ausgabe 4/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Excerpt

Health preference research (HPR) enumerates the tradeoffs that patients are willing to make between different healthcare attributes and the value that they place on competing alternatives [1]. Most preference studies consider “mean” preference estimates across populations in order to inform resource allocation decisions. However, clinical care is directed toward the individual patient. Therefore, individual-level preferences are required in order to inform decision making and to help patients choose between alternative treatments and services. Patients who know and understand their preferences may experience less decisional regret, increased levels of satisfaction, and improved communication with their healthcare providers [2]. …
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Craig BM, Mitchell SA. Examining the value of menopausal symptom relief among US women. Value Health. 2016;19(2):158–66.CrossRef Craig BM, Mitchell SA. Examining the value of menopausal symptom relief among US women. Value Health. 2016;19(2):158–66.CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Stacey D, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;1:1431. Stacey D, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;1:1431.
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Durand MA, et al. Do interventions designed to support shared decision-making reduce health inequalities? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(4):e94670.CrossRef Durand MA, et al. Do interventions designed to support shared decision-making reduce health inequalities? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(4):e94670.CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Weernink MGM, et al. A systematic review to identify the use of preference elicitation methods in healthcare decision making. Pharm Med. 2014;28(4):175–85.CrossRef Weernink MGM, et al. A systematic review to identify the use of preference elicitation methods in healthcare decision making. Pharm Med. 2014;28(4):175–85.CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Fraenkel L. Incorporating patients’ preferences into medical decision making. Med Care Res Rev. 2013;70(1 Suppl):80s–93s.CrossRef Fraenkel L. Incorporating patients’ preferences into medical decision making. Med Care Res Rev. 2013;70(1 Suppl):80s–93s.CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Saigal C, et al. Impact of a novel method of patient preference elicitation on decision quality in men with prostate cancer: pilot data. J Urol. 2012;187(4):e266–7. Saigal C, et al. Impact of a novel method of patient preference elicitation on decision quality in men with prostate cancer: pilot data. J Urol. 2012;187(4):e266–7.
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Lancsar E, Louviere J. Estimating individual level discrete choice models and welfare measures using best worst choice experiments and sequential best worst MNL, in Working Papers, CenSoC, Editor. 2008: University of Technology Sydney. Lancsar E, Louviere J. Estimating individual level discrete choice models and welfare measures using best worst choice experiments and sequential best worst MNL, in Working Papers, CenSoC, Editor. 2008: University of Technology Sydney.
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Johnson DC, et al. Integrating patient preference into treatment decisions for men with prostate cancer at the point of care. J Urol. 2016;196(6):1640–4.CrossRef Johnson DC, et al. Integrating patient preference into treatment decisions for men with prostate cancer at the point of care. J Urol. 2016;196(6):1640–4.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Assessment of Individual Patient Preferences to Inform Clinical Practice
verfasst von
Jennifer Anne Whitty
Liana Fraenkel
Christopher S. Saigal
Catharina G. M. Groothuis-Oudshoorn
Dean A. Regier
Deborah A. Marshall
Publikationsdatum
01.08.2017
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Ausgabe 4/2017
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Elektronische ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-017-0254-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2017

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 4/2017 Zur Ausgabe