Patient involvement in NICE technology appraisals

2018 ◽  
pp. 29-38
Author(s):  
Peter Littlejohns
Keyword(s):  
Patient Involvement

Patient Involvement in Treatment Decision Making Can Help or Hinder Placebo Analgesia

2014 ◽  
Vol 222 (3) ◽  
pp. 165-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew L. Geers ◽  
Jason P. Rose ◽  
Stephanie L. Fowler ◽  
Jill A. Brown
Keyword(s):  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Cold Water ◽  
Prior Experience ◽  
Water Immersion ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Cold Water Immersion ◽  
Not Given ◽  
Placebo Analgesia ◽  
Treatment Decision Making ◽  
Immersion Experience

Experiments have found that choosing between placebo analgesics can reduce pain more than being assigned a placebo analgesic. Because earlier research has shown prior experience moderates choice effects in other contexts, we tested whether prior experience with a pain stimulus moderates this placebo-choice association. Before a cold water pain task, participants were either told that an inert cream would reduce their pain or they were not told this information. Additionally, participants chose between one of two inert creams for the task or they were not given choice. Importantly, we also measured prior experience with cold water immersion. Individuals with prior cold water immersion experience tended to display greater placebo analgesia when given choice, whereas participants without this experience tended to display greater placebo analgesia without choice. Prior stimulus experience appears to moderate the effect of choice on placebo analgesia.

scholarly journals More than a method: trusting relationships, productive tensions, and two-way learning as mechanisms of authentic co-production

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Knowles ◽  
Dawn Allen ◽  
Ailsa Donnelly ◽  
Jackie Flynn ◽  
Kay Gallacher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Ways Of Knowing ◽  
Knowledge Mobilisation ◽  
Academic Knowledge ◽  
Willingness To Change ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Hybrid Knowledge ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Field Notes ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract Background Knowledge mobilisation requires the effective elicitation and blending of different types of knowledge or ways of knowing, to produce hybrid knowledge outputs that are valuable to both knowledge producers (researchers) and knowledge users (health care stakeholders). Patients and service users are a neglected user group, and there is a need for transparent reporting and critical review of methods used to co-produce knowledge with patients. This study aimed to explore the potential of participatory codesign methods as a mechanism of supporting knowledge sharing, and to evaluate this from the perspective of both researchers and patients. Methods A knowledge mobilisation research project using participatory codesign workshops to explore patient involvement in using health data to improve services. To evaluate involvement in the project, multiple qualitative data sources were collected throughout, including a survey informed by the Generic Learning Outcomes framework, an evaluation focus group, and field notes. Analysis was a collective dialogic reflection on project processes and impacts, including comparing and contrasting the key issues from the researcher and contributor perspectives. Results Authentic involvement was seen as the result of “space to talk” and “space to change”. "Space to talk" refers to creating space for shared dialogue, including space for tension and disagreement, and recognising contributor and researcher expertise as equally valuable to the discussion. ‘Space to change’ refers to space to adapt in response to contributor feedback. These were partly facilitated by the use of codesign methods which emphasise visual and iterative working, but contributors emphasised that relational openness was more crucial, and that this needed to apply to the study overall (specifically, how contributors were reimbursed as a demonstration of how their input was valued) to build trust, not just to processes within the workshops. Conclusions Specific methods used within involvement are only one component of effective involvement practice. The relationship between researcher and contributors, and particularly researcher willingness to change their approach in response to feedback, were considered most important by contributors. Productive tension was emphasised as a key mechanism in leading to genuinely hybrid outputs that combined contributor insight and experience with academic knowledge and understanding.

Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) – a Tool for Strengthening Patient Involvement and Measuring Outcome in Orthopaedic Outpatient Rehabilitation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus Müller ◽  
Joscha Brunssen ◽  
Martin Messingschlager
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Outpatient Rehabilitation ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Disc Surgery ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Quick Dash

AbstractThe present study serves to establish Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) as a tool for strengthening patient involvement and measuring outcomes in orthopaedic outpatient rehabilitation. Assessments by FFbH-R (Hannover Back Function Questionnaire for patients with back problems), Quick-DASH (Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Score for patients with upper extremity lesions), and LEFS (Lower Extremity Function Scale for patients with lower extremity lesions) were employed in 20 outpatient rehabilitation centres over a period of 12 months to evaluate changes in performance and participation from the subjective patient perspective. The following questionnaires were used: FFbH-R status post: lumbar disc surgery; cervical disc surgery; spinal canal decompression; conservative back pain treatment; other; Quick-DASH status post: rotator cuff reconstruction; shoulder arthroplasty; fracture (conservative or osteosynthesis); other; LEFS status post: hip arthroplasty; knee arthroplasty; anterior cruciate ligament repair; osteotomy; fracture (conservative treatment or osteosynthesis); other. Analysis of the 6,751 usable data sets demonstrated significant positive changes in all scores and diagnostic subgroups. The mean difference in score was 14.2 points in the FFbH-R, − 22 points in the Quick-DASH and 18 points in the LEFS. Thus, this study proves the positive effects of orthopaedic rehabilitation in an outpatient setting. PROs were instituted on a permanent basis in seven of the participating institutions.

scholarly journals P142 How can patients shape IBD research? Feedback from a nationwide patient involvement exercise

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kapil Sahnan ◽  
Sue Blackwell ◽  
Azmina Verjee ◽  
Helen Terry ◽  
Anita Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Involvement

scholarly journals Protocol for systematic review: patient decision aids for total hip and knee arthroplasty decision-making

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lissa Pacheco-Brousseau ◽  
Marylène Charette ◽  
Dawn Stacey ◽  
Stéphane Poitras
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Patient Decision Aids ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Hip And Knee Arthroplasty

Abstract Background Total hip and knee arthroplasty are a highly performed surgery; however, patient satisfaction with surgery results and patient involvement in the decision-making process remains low. Patient decision aids (PtDAs) are tools used in clinical practices to facilitate active patient involvement in healthcare decision-making. Nonetheless, PtDA effects have not been systematically evaluated for hip and knee total joint arthroplasty (TJA) decision-making. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the effect of patient decision aids compared to alternative of care on quality and process of decision-making when provided to adults with hip and knee osteoarthritis considering primary elective TJA. Methods This systematic review will follow the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. This protocol was reported based on the PRISMA-P checklist guidelines. Studies will be searched in CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Eligible studies will be randomized control trial (RCT) evaluating the effect of PtDA on TJA decision-making. Descriptive and meta-analysis of outcomes will include decision quality (knowledge and values-based choice), decisional conflict, patient involvement, decision-making process satisfaction, actual decision made, health outcomes, and harm(s). Risk of bias will be evaluated with Cochrane’s risk of bias tool for RCTs. Quality and strength of recommendations will be appraised with Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Discussion This review will provide a summary of RCT findings on PtDA effect on decision-making quality and process of adults with knee and hip osteoarthritis considering primary elective TJA. Further, it will provide evidence comparing different types of PtDA used for TJA decision-making. This review is expected to inform further research on joint replacement decision-making quality and processes and on ways PtDAs facilitate shared decision-making for orthopedic surgery. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020171334

VP37 Patient Involvement In EUnetHTA Assessments (Non-Pharma Technologies)

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (S1) ◽  
pp. 85-85
Author(s):  
Sabine Ettinger ◽  
Judit Erdos ◽  
Cecilia De Villiers
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Patient Organizations ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Patient Representatives ◽  
Health Related ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionPatients can provide valuable experience on living with diseases, health-related quality of life, various therapies and relevant outcomes. Their input and perspectives can be helpful in complementing health technology assessment (HTA) processes. The European Network for HTA (EUnetHTA), funded by the European Commission, aims to further advance and standardise patient involvement processes in order to add to the quality and applicability of HTAs and to allow capability building.MethodsDifferent methods for patient involvement in HTAs on non-pharmaceutical technologies were tested: Patient input templates (open questions sent to relevant patient organizations, or published on EUnetHTA website); scoping meeting with patients/patient representatives; one-on-one conversation and group conversation. Applied methods depended on the scope of the HTA and other factors like timelines of HTAs and burden of disease for patients.ResultsPatients were included in eight of sixteen HTAs on non-pharmaceutical technologies. Applied methods were: group conversation (n = 2), scoping meeting (n = 1), patient input templates (n = 4), one-on-one conversation (n = 2,) and other approach (i.e. written feedback on scope n= 2). In some HTAs more than one method was used. Main reasons for not including patients were inability to identify suitable patients or tight timelines. Patients' feedback on health-related quality of life and outcome measures proved most useful in the scoping phase.ConclusionsThe different approaches were useful for complementing HTA processes. Those need to be further tested and evaluated in order to formulate deeper understanding about the impact of patient involvement on HTA. Additionally, feedback from patients that were actively involved in the HTAs should be collected to further improve the involvement methods that should serve as basis for future recommendations post 2020.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document