Integrating evidence on patient preferences in healthcare policy decisions: protocol of the patient-VIP study

被引:39
作者
Dirksen, Carmen D. [1 ]
Utens, Cecile M. A. [1 ,2 ]
Joore, Manuela A. [1 ,2 ]
van Barneveld, Teus A. [3 ]
Boer, Bert [4 ]
Dreesens, Dunja H. H. [5 ,8 ]
van Laarhoven, Hans [6 ]
Smit, Cees [7 ]
Stiggelbout, Anne M. [8 ]
van der Weijden, Trudy [9 ]
机构
[1] Maastricht Univ, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Med Technol Assessment, Med Ctr, NL-6202 AZ Maastricht, Netherlands
[2] Maastricht Univ, Sch Publ Hlth & Primary Care, CAPHRI, NL-6200 MD Maastricht, Netherlands
[3] Dutch Assoc Med Specialists, Dept Support Profess Qual, NL-3502 LB Utrecht, Netherlands
[4] Hlth Care Insurance Board, Dept Insurance & Benefit Package, NL-1110 AH Diemen, Netherlands
[5] Hlth Care Insurance Board, Dept Qual, NL-1110 AH Diemen, Netherlands
[6] Hart & Vaatgrp, NL-2501 CH The Hague, Netherlands
[7] Dutch Genet Alliance VSOP, NL-3762 DA Soest, Netherlands
[8] Leiden Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Med Decis Making, NL-2300 RC Leiden, Netherlands
[9] Maastricht Univ, Sch Publ Hlth & Primary Care, CAPHRI, Dept Gen Practice, NL-6200 MD Maastricht, Netherlands
来源
IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE | 2013年 / 8卷
关键词
Patient preference; Coverage decisions; Clinical practice guidelines; Decision framework; Taxonomy; GUIDELINES INCORPORATE EVIDENCE; DISCRETE-CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; TECHNOLOGY-ASSESSMENT; EXPERIENCES; COUNTRIES; NICE;
D O I
10.1186/1748-5908-8-64
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Despite a strong movement towards active patient involvement in healthcare policy decisions, systematic and explicit consideration of evidence of this research on patient preferences seems limited. Furthermore, little is known about the opinions of several stakeholders towards consideration of research evidence on patient preferences in healthcare policy decisions. This paper describes the protocol for an explorative study on the integration of research on patient preferences in healthcare policy decisions. The study questions: to what extent research evidence on patient preferences is considered in current procedures for healthcare policy decisions; opinions of stakeholders regarding the integration of this type of evidence in healthcare policy decisions; and what could be a decision framework for the integration of such research evidence in healthcare policy decisions. Methods/design: The study is divided in three sub-studies, predominantly using qualitative methods. The first sub-study is a scoping review in five European countries to investigate whether and how results of research on patient preferences are considered in current procedures for coverage decisions and clinical practice guideline development. The second sub-study is a qualitative study to explore the opinions of stakeholders with regard to the possibilities for integrating evidence on patient preferences in the process of healthcare decision-making in the Netherlands. The third sub-study is the development of a decision framework for research on patient preferences. The framework will consist of: a process description regarding the place of evidence on patient preferences in the decision-making process; and a taxonomy describing different terminologies and conceptualisations of 'preferences' and an overview of existing methodologies for investigating preferences. The concept framework will be presented to and discussed with experts. Discussion: This study will create awareness regarding the existence and potential value of research evidence on patient preferences for healthcare policy decision-making and provides insight in the methods for investigating patient preferences and the barriers and facilitators for integration of such research in healthcare policy decisions. Results of the study will be useful for researchers, clinical practice guideline developers, healthcare policy makers, and patient representatives.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 44 条
  • [1] AGREE TANSC, 2009, APPR GUID RES EV 2 A
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1996, COST EFFECTIVENESS H, DOI DOI 10.1093/OSO/9780195108248.001.0001
  • [3] [Anonymous], 1994, HLTH POLICY, V55, P1
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2011, GAAN RICHTL DOELM SA
  • [5] Social cognition models and health behaviour: A structured review
    Armitage, CJ
    Conner, M
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGY & HEALTH, 2000, 15 (02) : 173 - 189
  • [6] Azjen I., 1988, ATTITUDES PERSONALIT
  • [7] Patient and public involvement in clinical guidelines: international experiences and future perspectives
    Boivin, Antoine
    Currie, Kay
    Fervers, Beatrice
    Gracia, Javier
    James, Marian
    Marshall, Catherine
    Sakala, Carol
    Sanger, Sylvia
    Strid, Judi
    Thomas, Victoria
    van der Weijden, Trudy
    Grol, Richard
    Burgers, Jako
    [J]. QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE, 2010, 19 (05):
  • [8] The Role of Patient Preferences in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis A Conflict of Values?
    Brazier, John E.
    Dixon, Simon
    Ratcliffe, Julie
    [J]. PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2009, 27 (09) : 705 - 712
  • [9] Future challenges for the economic evaluation of healthcare - Patient preferences, risk attitudes and beyond
    Bridges, JFP
    [J]. PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2005, 23 (04) : 317 - 321
  • [10] Patient-based health technology assessment: A vision of the future
    Bridges, John F. P.
    Jones, Christopher
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2007, 23 (01) : 30 - 35