BackgroundBiological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) used in second-line treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are administered parenterally. However, so-called targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs) – developed more recently – offer alternative (ie, oral) administration forms in second-line treatment. Since bDMARDs and tsDMARDs can be regarded as equal in terms of efficacy, the present study examines whether such characteristics as route of administration drive RA patients’ treatment choice. This may ultimately suggest superiority of some second-line DMARDs over equally effective options, at least according to RA-patient preferences.ObjectiveThe current study assessed the importance of oral administration among other treatment characteristics differing between available second-line DMARDs for RA patients’ preferences using a discrete-choice experiment (DCE).Materials and methodsThe DCE involved scenarios of three hypothetical treatment options in a d-efficient design with varying levels of key attributes (route and frequency of administration, time till onset of drug effect, combination therapy, possible side effects), as defined by focus groups. Further patient characteristics were recorded by an accompanying questionnaire. In the DCE, patients were asked to choose best and worst options (best–worst scaling). Results were analyzed by count analysis and adjusted regression analysis.ResultsA total of 1,588 subjects completed the DCE and were eligible for final analyses. Across all characteristics included in the DCE, “oral administration” was most desired and “intravenous infusion” was most strongly rejected. This was followed by “no combination with methotrexate” being strongly preferred and “intake every 1–2 weeks” being strongly rejected. On average, levels of route of administration showed strongest influences on patients’ decisions in post hoc bootstrapping analysis.ConclusionAccording to the results, an oral DMARD that does not have to be combined with methotrexate and is not administered (only) every 1–2 weeks appears a highly favorable treatment option for patients with RA. DMARDs meeting these preferences may increase compliance and adherence in RA treatment.
BackgroundHealthcare-utilization data for multiple sclerosis (MS) are scarce in Germany. The Purpose of the study was to analyse administrative prevalence of MS, medication use and type of specialists involved in MS treatment in the outpatient setting in Bavaria.MethodsPseudonymized claims data from Bavarian Statutory Health Insurance (SHI)-accredited physicians were used. Administrative prevalence of MS was defined as having ≥1 MS diagnosis (International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition, code G35) documented by a neurologist or psychiatrist, or ≥1 prescription for disease-modifying drugs (DMDs)). The administrative prevalence calculated for Bavaria was projected to Germany. DMD prescription and involvement of different specialities in health care service for MS patients was analysed.ResultsAdministrative prevalence of MS in Bavaria increased from 0.123% to 0.175% of insured persons between 2005 and 2009; when projected, this yielded ~102,000–143,000 patients with MS in the German population. The percentage of patients receiving ≥1 DMD prescription increased from 45.5% to 50.5%. Patients with MS were mainly treated by neurologists in the ambulatory care setting.ConclusionsThese results provide important information on the administrative prevalence of MS in Bavaria and on healthcare provision for patients, which is relevant for resource planning in the healthcare sector.
PurposeStapled transanal rectal resection (STARR) in patients with obstructive defecation syndrome (ODS) is limited by the capacity of the circular stapler used. This prospective cohort study was conducted to assess real-world clinical outcomes of STARR with the new CONTOUR® TRANSTAR™ device, shortly named TRANSTAR, at 12 months postoperatively.MethodsFrom January 2009 to January 2011, consecutive patients who underwent TRANSTAR in 22 European colorectal centers were enrolled in the study. Functional outcomes and quality of life were assessed by the changes in a number of scoring systems (Knowles-Eccersley-Scott-Symptom (KESS) score, ODS score, St. Mark’s score, Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) score, and Patient Assessment of Constipation—Quality of Life (PAC-QoL) score), at 12 months as compared to baseline. All complications were recorded and analyzed.ResultsA total of 100 patients (98 % female), mean age 60 years, were entered in the study. Statistically significant improvements were seen in the KESS (median 18 vs. 6; p < 0.01), ODS (median 15 vs. 4; p < 0.01), and PAC-Qol scores (median 2.10 vs. 0.86; p < 0.01). St. Mark’s and EQ-5D scores improved nonsignificantly. Complications were reported in 11 % of patients, including bleeding (5 %), staple line complications (3 %), urinary retention (2 %), and persistent pain (1 %). No major complications or mortality occurred.ConclusionTRANSTAR facilitated a tailored, real circumferential full-thickness rectal resection, leading to improved patient functional and quality of life outcomes at 12 months postoperatively. It represents a safe and effective treatment for ODS in local clinical practice, although the sustainability of real-world results needs to be proven in the long-term follow-up.
The increasing political importance of patients' attitudes and satisfaction for the development of policy measures to ensure and improve the quality of care is beyond doubt. To make sure that the measurement of patient satisfaction does not only serve to meet regulatory requirements but helps to improve the quality of care and provides reliable data for health services research, a high standard is required for the questionnaires to be used. The Qualiskope-A and only few other instruments meet this high standard.
Identified predictors of greater HbA1c reduction, target goal achievement, and insulin dose needed may help to optimize the balance of benefits and risks with the use of insulin glargine.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.