4.5 Article

Patient-relevant needs and treatment goals in nail psoriasis

期刊

QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
卷 25, 期 5, 页码 1179-1188

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-015-1136-y

关键词

Nail psoriasis; Patient preferences; Quality of life; Treatment goals; Shared decision-making

资金

  1. Merck Sharp and Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Patient-centered health care implies that medical decisions are made jointly by physician and patient, based on patient needs. Aims were to (a) identify treatment goals for a new questionnaire on patient needs and benefits in nail psoriasis treatment; (b) analyze the importance of treatment goals in patients with nail psoriasis in general and in defined subgroups; and (c) determine the association between overall treatment goal importance and quality of life. The study comprised the following steps: qualitative survey on needs and burdens in 120 patients; development of items by an interdisciplinary expert group; item testing in 55 patients in four countries; revision of the questionnaire and assessment in 203 patients in six countries (Germany, Denmark, Italy, Spain, USA, Japan). The percentage of patients rating the goals as 'quite/very important' was compared between various patient subgroups. Based on 692 free-text statements, 26 items were developed which were reduced to 24 items after pilot testing. Each of these treatment goals applied to the majority of patients in the multi-center study. Goal importance increased with severity of nail psoriasis, but not with age or disease duration. Manual dexterity and social interaction were of particular importance. Goal importance and quality of life were associated, but not redundant (r = 0.612, p < 0.001). Patients with nail psoriasis have manifold and specific treatment goals. Goal importance is a construct different from disease-specific quality of life and should be assessed separately. The new questionnaire can support goal setting in clinical practice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据