Patient-Important Outcomes in the Long-Term Treatment of Bipolar Disorder: A Mixed-Methods Approach Investigating Relative Preferences and a Proposed Taxonomy

Patient

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 91-102

  Eiring, Øystein ^a,b   Nylenna, Magne ^a,b   Nytrøen, Kari ^a,c,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^b NORWEGIAN KNOWLEDGE CENTRE FOR THE HEALTH SERVICES   (Norway)

^c INNLANDET HOSPITAL TRUST   (Norway)

^d OSLO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; ARTICLE; BIPOLAR DISORDER; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COGNITION; DISEASE SEVERITY; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; FEMALE; HUMAN; LONG TERM CARE; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OUTPATIENT; PATIENT CARE; PHARMACEUTICAL CARE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; SEX RATIO; SOCIAL INTERACTION; SUPPORT GROUP; WEIGHT GAIN; CLASSIFICATION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MIDDLE AGED; NORWAY; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

PSYCHOTROPIC AGENT;

BIPOLAR DISORDER; FEMALE; FOCUS GROUPS; HUMANS; LONG-TERM CARE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NORWAY; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PATIENT-CENTERED CARE; PSYCHOTROPIC DRUGS; QUALITY OF LIFE; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84929698740     PISSN: 11781653     EISSN: 11781661     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s40271-015-0128-x     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Merikangas KR, Jin R, He JP, Kessler RC, Lee S, Sampson NA, et al. Prevalence and correlates of bipolar spectrum disorder in the world mental health survey initiative. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011;68(3):241–51.
2. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Bipolare Störungen (DGBS) DGfrP, Psychotherapie und Nervenheilkunde DGPPN. DGBS e.V. und DGPPN e.V.: S3-Leitlinie zur Diagnostik und Therapie Bipolarer Störungen. Langversion, 2012.
3. Singapore Ministry of Health. Clinical practice guidelines, bipolar disorder. 2011. https://www.moh.gov.sg/content/moh_web/healthprofessionalsportal/doctors/guidelines/cpg_medical/2011/cpgmed_bipolar_disorder.html. Accessed 11 Nov 2014.
4. Yatham LN, Kennedy SH, Parikh SV, Schaffer A, Beaulieu S, Alda M, et al. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) collaborative update of CANMAT guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder: update 2013. Bipolar Disord. 2013;15:1–44.
5. Post RM Keck P, Solomon D. Bipolar disorder in adults: choosing maintenance treatment. UpToDate. 2014. http://www.uptodate.com/contents/bipolar-disorder-in-adults-maintenance-treatment?source=see_link. Accessed 11 Nov 2014.
6. Bipolar disorders in adults. BMJ Best Pract. 2013. http://bestpractice.bmj.com/best-practice/monograph/488/treatment/step-by-step.html. Accessed 11 Nov 2014.
7. Helsedirektoratet. Nasjonal fagleg retningsline for utgreiing og behandling av bipolare lidingar. Helsebiblioteket. 2012. http://www.helsebiblioteket.no/retningslinjer/bipolare-lidingar/vedlikehaldsbehandling. Accessed 11 Nov 2014.
8. Dolan JG. Multi-criteria clinical decision support: a primer on the use of multiple criteria decision making methods to promote evidence-based, patient-centered healthcare. Patient. 2010;3(4):229–48.
9. Miura T, Noma H, Furakawa TA, et al. Comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatments in the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry. 2014;1:351–9.
10. Fleurence R, Whicher D, Dunham K, Gerson J, Newhouse R, Luce B. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute’s role in advancing methods for patient-centered outcomes research. Med Care. 2015;53(1):2–8.
11. Sacristan JA. Patient-centered medicine and patient-oriented research: improving health outcomes for individual patients. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13:6.
12. Elwyn G, Laitner S, Coulter A, Walker E, Watson P, Thomson R. Implementing shared decision making in the NHS. BMJ. 2010;341:c5146.
13. Breckenridge A. Patient opinions and preferences in drug development and regulatory decision making. Drug Discov Today Technol. 2011;8(1):e1–42.
14. van der Weijden T, Legare F, Boivin A, Burgers JS, van Veenendaal H, Stiggelbout AM, et al. How to integrate individual patient values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines? A research protocol. Implement Sci. 2010;5:10.
15. Ryan M, Scott DA, Reeves C, Bate A, van Teijlingen ER, Russell EM, et al. Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: a systematic review of techniques. Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(5):1–186.
16. Bridges JF. Stated preference methods in health care evaluation: an emerging methodological paradigm in health economics. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2003;2(4):213–24.
17. Ryan M, Kinghorn P, Entwistle VA, Francis JJ. Valuing patients’ experiences of healthcare processes: towards broader applications of existing methods. Soc Sci Med. 2014;106:194–203.
18. Eiring Ø, Landmark BF, Aas E, Salkeld G, Nylenna M, Nytrøen K. What matters to patients? A systematic review of preferences for medication-associated outcomes in mental disorders. BMJ Open. 2015;5(4):e007848.
19. Chrzan K, Golovashkina N. An empirical test of six stated importance measures. Int J Market Res. 2006;48(6):717–40.
20. Schlereth C, Eckert C, Schaaf R, Skiera B. Measurement of preferences with self-explicated approaches: a classification and merge of trade-off- and non-trade-off-based evaluation types. Eur J Oper Res. 2014;238(1):185–98.
21. Scholz SW, Meissner M, Decker R. Measuring consumer preferences for complex products: a compositional approach based on paired comparisons. J Mark Res. 2010;47(4):685–98.
22. Bridges JF, Slawik L, Schmeding A, Reimer J, Naber D, Kuhnigk O. A test of concordance between patient and psychiatrist valuations of multiple treatment goals for schizophrenia. Health Expect. 2013;16(2):164–76.
23. Fraenkel L, Chodkowski D, Lim J, Garcia-Tsao G. Patients’ preferences for treatment of hepatitis C. Med Decis Mak. 2010;30(1):45–57.
24. Pavlova M, Groot W, van Merode G. The importance of quality, access and price to health care consumers in Bulgaria: a self-explicated approach. Int J Health Plan Manag. 2003;18(4):343–61.
25. Lenert L, Kaplan RM. Validity and interpretation of preference-based measures of health-related quality of life. Med Care. 2000;38(9 Suppl):II138–50.
26. The Guidelines International Network. International Guideline Library [database]. http://www.g-i-n.net. Accessed Oct 2014.
27. National Guideline Clearinghouse. Resource for evidence-based clinical practice guidelines [database]. http://www.guideline.gov. Accessed Oct 2014.
28. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI). Patient decision aids. https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/AZinvent.php. Accessed Nov 2014.
29. Grudens-Schuck N, Allen B, Larson K. Focus group fundamentals (methodology brief). 2004. https://store.extension.iastate.edu/Product/Focus-Group-Fundamentals-Methodology-Brief.
30. Guidelines for conducting a focus group. 2005. http://assessment.aas.duke.edu/documents/How_to_Conduct_a_Focus_Group.pdf.
31. Masadeh MA. Focus group: review and practices. Int J Appl Sci Technol. 2012;2(10):63–8.
32. Opmeer BC, de Borgie CA, Mol BW, Bossuyt PM. Assessing preferences regarding healthcare interventions that involve non-health outcomes: an overview of clinical studies. Patient. 2010;3(1):1–10.
33. Johnson FR, Ozdemir S, Manjunath R, Hauber AB, Burch SP, Thompson TR. Factors that affect adherence to bipolar disorder treatments: a stated-preference approach. Med Care. 2007;45(6):545–52.
34. Revicki DA, Hanlon J, Martin S, Gyulai L, Nassir Ghaemi S, Lynch F, et al. Patient-based utilities for bipolar disorder-related health states. J Affect Disord. 2005;87(2–3):203–10.
35. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2013.
36. Vieta A, Badia X, Alvarez E, Sacristan JA. Which nontraditional outcomes should be measured in healthcare decision-making in schizophrenia? A systematic review. Perspect Psychiatr Care. 2012;48(4):198–207.
37. Sattler H, Hensel-Börner S. A comparison of conjoint measurement with self-explicated approaches. In: Gustafsson A, Herrmann A, Huber F, editors. conjoint measurement. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2007. p. 67–76.
38. Von Nitzsch R, Weber M. The effect of attribute ranges on weights in multiattribute utility measurements. Manag Sci. 1993;39(8):937–43.
39. Paykel ES, Abbott R, Morriss R, Hayhurst H, Scott J. Sub-syndromal and syndromal symptoms in the longitudinal course of bipolar disorder. Br J Psychiatry. 2006;189:118–23.
40. Mair FS, May CR. Thinking about the burden of treatment. BMJ. 2014;349:g6680.
41. Dell’Osso L, Pini S, Cassano GB, Mastrocinque C, Seckinger RA, Saettoni M, et al. Insight into illness in patients with mania, mixed mania, bipolar depression and major depression with psychotic features. Bipolar Disord. 2002;4(5):315–22.
42. Bridges JF, Onukwugha E, Johnson FR, Hauber AB. Patient preference methods: a patient-centered evaluation paradigm. ISPOR Connect. 2007;13(6):4–7.
43. Riabacke M, Danielson M, Ekenberg L. State-of-the-art prescriptive criteria weight elicitation. Adv Decis Sci. 2012;. doi:10.1155/2012/276584.
44. Basu A, Meltzer D. Value of information on preference heterogeneity and individualized care. Med Decis Mak. 2007;27(2):112–27.
45. van Gestel A, Grutters J, Schouten J, Webers C, Beckers H, Joore M, et al. The role of the expected value of individualized care in cost-effectiveness analyses and decision making. Value Health. 2012;15(1):13–21.
46. Listing relevant outcomes. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org