Understanding and using patient experiences as evidence in healthcare priority setting

Abstract

Background In many countries, committees make priority-setting decisions in order to control healthcare costs. These decisions take into account relevant criteria, including clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and need, and are supported by evidence usually drawn from clinical and economic studies. These sources of evidence do not include the specific perspective and information that patients can provide about the condition and treatment. Methods Drawing on arguments from political philosophy and ethics that are the ethical basis for many priority-setting bodies, the authors argue that criteria like need and its effects on patients and caregivers are best supported by evidence generated from patients’ experiences. Social sciences and mixed-methods research support the generation and collection of robust evidence. Results Patient experience is required for a decision-making process that considers all relevant evidence. For fair priority-setting, decision-makers should consider relevant evidence and reasons, so patient experience evidence should not be ignored. Patient experience must be gathered in a way that generates high quality and methodologically rigorous evidence. Established quantitative and qualitative methods can assure that evidence is systematic, adherent to quality standards, and valid. Patient, like clinical, evidence should be subject to a transparent review process. Discussion Considering all relevant evidence gives each person an equal opportunity at having their treatment funded. Patient experience gives context to the clinical evidence and also directly informs our understanding of the nature of the condition and its effects, including patients’ needs, how to meet them, and the burden of illness. Such evidence also serves to contextualise reported effects of the treatment. The requirement to include patient experience as evidence has important policy implications for bodies that make priority-setting decisions since it proposes that new types of evidence reviews are commissioned and considered.

Patient experiences with technology enabled care across healthcare settings- a systematic review

“…Patient perspectives can provide important, relevant insight into the nature of patients' needs, the condition, and the treatment under consideration. Moreover, this may provide a useful evaluation tool for new healthcare technologies that have limited clinical data to support claims of effectiveness [25]. Experience-based measures differ from measures of satisfaction, which have previously been used as an index of how care has been received.…”

Primary Care Networks and Starfield’s 4Cs: A Case for Enhanced Chronic Disease Management

“…However, as data were limited to the providers’ perspective, we propose a future study to understand how features of the PCN fit well with Starfield’s “4Cs” framework from the patients’ angle. Integrating patients’ perspective to tweak health delivery models unlocks opportunities to improve patient satisfaction, patient experience and overall health outcomes [ 65 ]. Therefore, though still in its early stage of development, PCN has proven to be well positioned to drive private GPs towards enhanced chronic disease management.…”

Priority Setting in the Polish Health Care System According to Patients’ Perspective

“…The obtained results of the survey of patients' opinions may make it possible to identify effective and patient-friendly solutions in health care, but also allow the recognition of limitations while implementing health services [17].…”