Search

Your search keyword '"patient preference study"' showing total 2 results
Start Over Descriptor "patient preference study" Journal bmc women's health
2 results on '"patient preference study"'

1. "You can't always get what you want": from doctrine to practicability of study designs for clinical investigation in endometriosis.

Author

Vercellini, Paolo, Somigliana, Edgardo, Cortinovis, Ivan, Bracco, Benedetta, de Braud, Lucrezia, Dridi, Dhouha, and Milani, Silvano

Subjects
*CLINICAL trials, *ENDOMETRIOSIS, *EXPERIMENTAL design, *LONGITUDINAL method, *PELVIC pain, *PSYCHOLOGY
Abstract

Background: Patients, now generally well informed through dedicated websites and support organizations, are beginning to look askance at clinical experimentation. We conducted a survey investigation to verify whether women with endometriosis would still accept to participate in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) on treatment for pelvic pain.Methods: A total of 500 patients consecutively self-referring to an academic outpatient endometriosis clinic, were asked to compile two questionnaires focused on hypothetical comparisons between a new drug and a standard drug, and between medical and surgical treatment, for endometriosis-associated pelvic pain. The main outcome measure was the percentage of patients willing to participate in a theoretical RCT.Results: A total of 239 (48 %) women would decline participation in a comparative study on a new drug and a standard drug, as 204 (41 %) would prefer the former medication, and 35 (7 %) the latter. Fifty women (10 %) would participate in a RCT, but only 24 (5 %) would accept blinding. The most frequently chosen option was the patient preference trial (211; 42 %). No significant differences were observed in demographic and clinical characteristics between the 50 women who would accept and the 450 who would decline to be enrolled in a RCT. A total of 229 women (46 %) would decline participation in a comparative study on medical versus surgical treatment, as 186 (37 %) would prefer pharmacological therapy and 43 (9 %) a surgical procedure. Only 11 (2 %) women would participate in such a RCT. More than half of the women (260; 52 %) selected the patient preference trial. No significant variations in distributions of answers were observed between women who did or did not undergo a previous surgical procedure.Conclusion: Only a small minority of the women included in our study sample would accept randomization, and even less so blinding. Patient preference appears to play a central role when planning interventional trials on endometriosis-associated pelvic pain. Adequately designed observational analytic studies could be considered when recruitment in a RCT appears cumbersome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2015
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. 'You can't always get what you want': from doctrine to practicability of study designs for clinical investigation in endometriosis

Author

Edgardo Somigliana, Ivan Cortinovis, Paolo Vercellini, Benedetta Bracco, Silvano Milani, Lucrezia de Braud, and Dhouha Dridi

Subjects
Research design, Adult, medicine.medical_specialty, Blinding, Randomization, Endometriosis, Patient preference study, Pelvic Pain, law.invention, Randomized controlled trial, law, Observational study, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, medicine, Humans, Prospective Studies, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Medicine(all), business.industry, Pelvic pain, Clinical study design, Obstetrics and Gynecology, General Medicine, Middle Aged, medicine.disease, Reproductive Medicine, Research Design, Physical therapy, Female, medicine.symptom, Before and after study, business, Research Article
Abstract

Background Patients, now generally well informed through dedicated websites and support organizations, are beginning to look askance at clinical experimentation. We conducted a survey investigation to verify whether women with endometriosis would still accept to participate in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) on treatment for pelvic pain. Methods A total of 500 patients consecutively self-referring to an academic outpatient endometriosis clinic, were asked to compile two questionnaires focused on hypothetical comparisons between a new drug and a standard drug, and between medical and surgical treatment, for endometriosis-associated pelvic pain. The main outcome measure was the percentage of patients willing to participate in a theoretical RCT. Results A total of 239 (48 %) women would decline participation in a comparative study on a new drug and a standard drug, as 204 (41 %) would prefer the former medication, and 35 (7 %) the latter. Fifty women (10 %) would participate in a RCT, but only 24 (5 %) would accept blinding. The most frequently chosen option was the patient preference trial (211; 42 %). No significant differences were observed in demographic and clinical characteristics between the 50 women who would accept and the 450 who would decline to be enrolled in a RCT. A total of 229 women (46 %) would decline participation in a comparative study on medical versus surgical treatment, as 186 (37 %) would prefer pharmacological therapy and 43 (9 %) a surgical procedure. Only 11 (2 %) women would participate in such a RCT. More than half of the women (260; 52 %) selected the patient preference trial. No significant variations in distributions of answers were observed between women who did or did not undergo a previous surgical procedure. Conclusion Only a small minority of the women included in our study sample would accept randomization, and even less so blinding. Patient preference appears to play a central role when planning interventional trials on endometriosis-associated pelvic pain. Adequately designed observational analytic studies could be considered when recruitment in a RCT appears cumbersome.

Published
2014

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results