Back to Journals » Patient Preference and Adherence » Volume 11

Shared decision-making for biologic treatment of autoimmune disease: influence on adherence, persistence, satisfaction, and health care costs

Authors Lofland JH, Johnson PT, Ingham MP, Rosemas SC, White JC, Ellis L

Received 25 January 2017

Accepted for publication 30 March 2017

Published 18 May 2017 Volume 2017:11 Pages 947—958

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S133222

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Dr Akshita Wason

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Johnny Chen

Jennifer H Lofland,1 Phaedra T Johnson,2 Mike P Ingham,3 Sarah C Rosemas,2 John C White,2 Lorie Ellis3

1Janssen Global Commercial Strategic Organization – Immunology, Raritan, NJ, 2Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Optum Inc., Eden Prairie, MN, 3Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Raritan, NJ, USA

Background: Shared decision-making (SDM), a process whereby physicians and patients collaborate to select interventions, is not well understood for biologic treatment of autoimmune conditions.
Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey of adults initiating treatment for Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis (inflammatory bowel disease, IBD) or psoriatic arthritis or rheumatoid arthritis (RAPA). Survey data were linked to administrative claims for 6 months before (baseline) and after (follow-up) therapy initiation. Measures included the Shared Decision Making Questionnaire, Patient Activation Measure (PAM), Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS), general health, and treatment satisfaction. Claims-based Quan–Charlson comorbidity scores, persistence, medication possession ratio (MPR), and health care costs were examined. Patients were compared by participation (SDM) and nonparticipation (non-SDM) in SDM.
Results: Among 453 respondents, 357 were eligible, and 306 patients (204 RAPA and 102 IBD) were included in all analyses. Overall (n=357), SDM participants (n=120) were more often females (75.0% vs 62.5%, P=0.018), had lower health status (48.0 vs 55.4, P=0.005), and higher Quan–Charlson scores (1.0 vs 0.7, P=0.035) than non-SDM (n=237) participants. Lower MMAS scores (SDM 0.17 vs non-SDM 0.41; P<0.05) indicated greater likelihood of adherence; SDM participants also reported higher satisfaction with medication and had greater activation (PAM SDM vs non-SDM 66.9 vs 61.6; P<0.001). Mean MPR did not differ, but persistence was longer among SDM participants (111.2 days vs 102.2 days for non-SDM; P=0.029). Costs did not differ by SDM status overall, or among patients with RAPA. The patients with IBD, however, experienced lower (P=0.003) total costs ($9,404 for SDM vs $25,071 for non-SDM) during follow-up.
Conclusion: This study showed greater likelihood of adherence and satisfaction for patients who engaged in SDM and reduced health care costs among patients with IBD who engaged in SDM. This study provides a basis for defining SDM participation and detecting differences by SDM participation for biologic treatment selection for autoimmune conditions.

Keywords: biologic therapy, autoimmune disease, cross-sectional survey, shared decision-making

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]