Important Treatment Outcomes for Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: A Multisite Qualitative Study

Emma Dures (), Sarah Hewlett, Jane Lord, Clive Bowen, Neil McHugh and William Tillett
Additional contact information
Emma Dures: University of the West of England
Sarah Hewlett: University of the West of England
Jane Lord: University Hospitals Bristol
Clive Bowen: The Psoriatic Arthritis Support Group (PsAZZ)
Neil McHugh: University of Bath
William Tillett: Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2017, vol. 10, issue 4, No 8, 455-462

Abstract: Abstract Background Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a variable and complex inflammatory condition. Symptoms can compromise physical function, reduce quality of life, and accrue significant health costs. Commonly used patient-reported outcomes largely reflect the professionals’ perspective, however it is not known whether they capture what is important to patients. Objective The aim of our study was to identify treatment outcomes important to patients with PsA. Methods Eight focus groups that were audio recorded, transcribed, anonymised and analysed using inductive thematic analysis were conducted at five hospital sites. The full data set was analysed by the lead researcher, and subsets analysed by three team members (including patient partners). Results Overall, 41 patients sampled for a range of phenotypes and domains of disease activity participated in the study: 20 males; mean age 58 years (range 28–75, standard deviation [SD] 11.4); mean disease duration 9 years (range 0.5–39, SD 8.3); and mean Health Assessment Questionnaire score of 1 (range 0.0–2.5, SD 0.7). Over 60 outcomes were identified and grouped into four themes: (i) symptom alleviation (e.g. pain, fatigue, itchy skin, swelling, and reducing variability); (ii) reduction of disease impact (e.g. tiredness and pain, mobility and dexterity, deteriorating physical fitness, negative emotional responses, and strained relationships and social interactions); (iii) improved prognosis (e.g. slowing down disease progression, maintaining independence, and enhancing quality of life); and (iv) minimisation of treatment harm and burden (e.g. nausea, long-term effects, and administration and monitoring of treatments). Conclusions Outcomes from treatments that are important to patients, which relate to impacts from PsA and its treatment that range beyond those outcomes commonly measured, were identified. These patient perspectives need to be considered when evaluating treatments.

Date: 2017
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-017-0221-4 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:patien:v:10:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s40271-017-0221-4

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40271

DOI: 10.1007/s40271-017-0221-4

Access Statistics for this article

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research is currently edited by Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research from Springer, International Academy of Health Preference Research
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().