Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1186/s13047-017-0240-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
This study sought to establish the preferences of people with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) about the best outcome measure for a health and fitness intervention randomised controlled trial (RCT). The results of this study were used to inform the choice of the trial primary and secondary outcome measure.
A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used to assess people’s preferences regarding a number of outcomes (foot and ankle pain, fatigue, mobility, ability to perform daily activities, choice of footwear) as well as different schedules and frequency of delivery for the health and fitness intervention. The outcomes were chosen based on literature review, clinician recommendation and patients’ focus groups. The DCE was constructed in SAS software using the D-efficiency criteria. It compared hypothetical scenarios with varying levels of outcomes severity and intervention schedule. Preference weights were estimated using appropriate econometric models. The partial log-likelihood method was used to assess the attribute importance.
One hundred people with RA completed 18 choice sets. Overall, people selected foot and ankle pain as the most important outcome, with mobility being nearly as important. There was no evidence of differential preference between intervention schedules or frequency of delivery.
Foot and ankle pain can be considered the patient choice for primary outcome of an RCT relating to a health and fitness intervention. This study demonstrated that, by using the DCE method, it is possible to incorporate patients’ preferences at the design stage of a RCT. This approach ensures patient involvement at early stages of health care design.
Additional file 1: Figure S1. Participant information sheet. Figure S2. Example DCE choice set. (DOCX 17 kb)13047_2017_240_MOESM1_ESM.docx
Additional file 2: Additional Notes on Data analysis. (DOCX 21 kb)13047_2017_240_MOESM2_ESM.docx
Additional file 3: Additional Notes on Results. (DOCX 21 kb)13047_2017_240_MOESM3_ESM.docx
Symmons D, Turner G, Webb R, Asten P, Barrett E, Lunt M, Scott D, Silman A. The prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis in the United Kingdom: new estimates for a new century. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2002;41:793–800. CrossRef
Arthritis Research UK: How common is rheumatoid arthritis? 2015:accessed 2017.
Kadakia AR. Rheumatoid arthritis of the foot and ankle. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Last reviewed December. 2011; Accessed 4 Apr 2017
Leeden MVD, Steultjens MPM, Ursum J, Dahmen R, Roorda LD, Schaardenburg DV, Dekker J. Prevalence and course of forefoot impairments and walking disability in the first eight years of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2008;59:1596–602. CrossRef
ESCAPE-pain: http://www.escape-pain.org. Accessed September 2017.
Torgerson DJ, Torgerson CJ. Designing randomised trials in health, education and the social sciences. Basingstoke: An Introduction: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008. CrossRef
INVOLVE: Public involvement in clinical trials. http://www.invo.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/INVOLVE-Clinical-trials-supplement-rev-March-2015.pdf.
NHS England: Shared decision making. https://www.england.nhs.uk/sdm/. Accessed Sept 2017.
Ryan M, Gerard K, Amaya-Amaya M. Using discrete choice experiments to value health and health care. Netherlands: Springer; 2007.
Felson DT, Anderson JJ, Boers M, Bombardier C, Chernoff M, Fried B, Furst D, Goldsmith C, Kieszak S, Lightfoot R, et al. The American College of Rheumatology preliminary core set of disease activity measures for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. The committee on outcome measures in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. Arthritis Rheum. 1993;36:729–40. CrossRefPubMed
Boers M, Tugwell P, Felson DT, van Riel PL, Kirwan JR, Edmonds JP, Smolen JS, Khaltaev N, Muirden KD. World Health Organization and international league of associations for rheumatology core endpoints for symptom modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. J Rheumatol Suppl. 1994;41:86–9. PubMed
Sanderson T, Morris M, Calnan M, Richards P, Hewlett S. What outcomes from pharmacologic treatments are important to people with rheumatoid arthritis? Creating the basis of a patient core set. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010;62:640–6. CrossRef
OMERACT: https://www.omeract.org/. Accessed May 2017.
Kirwan JR, Minnock P, Adebajo A, Bresnihan B, Choy E, de Wit M, Hazes M, Richards P, Saag K, Suarez-Almazor M, et al. Patient perspective: fatigue as a recommended patient centered outcome measure in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2007;34:1174–7. PubMed
Ahlmen M, Nordenskiold U, Archenholtz B, Thyberg I, Ronnqvist R, Linden L, Andersson AK, Mannerkorpi K. Rheumatology outcomes: the patient's perspective. A multicentre focus group interview study of Swedish rheumatoid arthritis patients. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2005;44:105–10. CrossRef
PME D, Davitt M, Filho DJ, Battistella LR, Bertolo MB. The effect of foot orthoses in rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006;45:449–53. CrossRef
Woodburn J, Barker S, Helliwell PS. A randomized controlled trial of foot orthoses in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2002;29:1377–83. PubMed
Ryan M, Kolstad J, Rockers P, Dolea C. How to conduct a discrete choice experiment for health workforce recruitment and retention in remote and rural areas: a user guide with case studies, Report number 74489. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2012.
Kuhfeld W. Marketing research methods in SAS: experimental design, choice, conjoint and graphical techniques. Cary: SAS Institute Inc; 2010.
Louviere JJ, Hensher DA, Swait JD. Stated choice methods: analysis and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000. CrossRef
McFadden D, Train K. Mixed MNL models for discrete response. J Appl Econ. 2000;15:447–70. CrossRef
Fiebig DG, Keane MP, Louviere J, Wasi N. The generalized multinomial logit model: accounting for scale and coefficient heterogeneity. Marketing Sci. 2010;29:393–421. CrossRef
Hole AR. Fitting mixed logit models by using maximum simulated likelihood. Stata J. 2007;7:388–401.
Gu Y, Hole A, Knox S. Fitting the generalized multinomial logit model in Stata. Stata J. 2013;13:382–97.
- Identifying the primary outcome for a randomised controlled trial in rheumatoid arthritis: the role of a discrete choice experiment
- BioMed Central