• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Value in health: the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research >Best Methods of Communicating Clinical Trial Data to Improve Understanding of Treatments for Patients with Multiple Sclerosis
【24h】

Best Methods of Communicating Clinical Trial Data to Improve Understanding of Treatments for Patients with Multiple Sclerosis

机译：沟通临床试验数据的最佳方法，以改善多发性硬化症患者治疗的理解

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background: Patients' understanding of treatment risks and benefits is a prerequisite for shared decision making. Yet, patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) do not accurately understand treatment information provided in regular clinical consultations. Objectives: To identify the best methods of communicating clinical trial data to improve the understanding of treatments among patients with MS and to also examine the relationship between patients' understanding with decisional conflict, individual traits, and MS symptoms. Methods: A repeated-measures study was used. A sample of relapsing-remitting patients with MS was recruited from National Health Service sites in the United Kingdom. Patients were presented with hypothetical treatment risks and benefits from faux clinical trials. Treatments were communicated using absolute terms, relative terms, and numbers needed to treat/harm. The presence of baseline information with each method was also manipulated. Patients' understanding and conflict in treatment decisions were assessed. Individual traits and MS symptoms were also recorded. Results: Understanding was better when treatments were communicated in absolute terms (mean 3.99 +/- 0.93) compared with relative terms (mean 2.93 +/- 0.91; P 0.001) and numbers needed to treat/harm (mean 2.89 +/- 0.88; P 0.001). Adding baseline information to all methods significantly improved understanding (mean 5.04 +/- 0.96) compared with no baseline information (mean 1.50 +/- 0.74; P 0.001). Understanding was not related to conflict in treatment decisions (r = -0.131; P = 0.391). Numeracy, IQ and cognitive impairments were significantly related to patients' understanding of treatments. Conclusions: Treatment risks and benefits should ideally be communicated using absolute terms, alongside baseline information. Patients with MS with low numeracy, low IQ and reduced cognitive skills should be supported during treatment education.
机译：背景：患者对治疗风险和福利的理解是共享决策的先决条件。然而，多发性硬化症（MS）的患者不准确地理解定期临床咨询中提供的治疗信息。目标：确定沟通临床试验数据的最佳方法，以改善MS患者患者的治疗方法，并审查患者了解果断冲突，个别特征和MS症状之间的关系。方法：使用重复措施研究。从英国国家卫生服务地点招募了重复延迟MS患者的样本。患者患有假想的治疗风险和益索临床试验的益处。使用绝对的术语，相对术语和治疗/伤害所需的数量来传达治疗。还被操纵了每个方法的基线信息的存在。患者的理解和治疗决策的识别和冲突进行了评估。还记录了个体特征和MS症状。结果：当治疗以绝对术语（平均3.99 +/- 0.93）相比，理解与相对术语相比（平均2.93 +/- 0.91; p <0.001）和治疗/伤害所需的数量（平均2.89 +/- 0.88; p <0.001）。向所有方法添加基线信息显着提高了理解（平均5.04 +/- 0.96），而没有基线信息（平均1.50 +/- 0.74; P <0.001）。理解与治疗决策中的冲突无关（r = -0.131; p = 0.391）。研究，智商和认知障碍与患者对治疗的理解有显着相关。结论：理想情况下，应使用绝对术语，以及基线信息的绝对术语进行治疗风险和效益。在治疗教育期间，应支持患有低计数，低智商和减少认知技能的患者。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号