Revisión sistemática de la literatura de valores y preferencias de los pacientes con asma para la toma de decisiones de salud.

dc.contributorYepes Nuñez, Juan José
dc.contributorGarcía Morales, Olga Milena
dc.contributorLoayza Betancur, Andrés Felipe
dc.contributorDe la Pava, Camilo
dc.contributorRivera Pinzón, Diana Carolina
dc.contributorProyecto FAPA
dc.creatorPariona Crispín, Jessica Emilia
dc.date.accessioned2023-07-11T16:01:00Z
dc.date.accessioned2023-09-07T01:21:30Z
dc.date.available2023-07-11T16:01:00Z
dc.date.available2023-09-07T01:21:30Z
dc.date.created2023-07-11T16:01:00Z
dc.date.issued2023-05-27
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/1992/68330
dc.identifierinstname:Universidad de los Andes
dc.identifierreponame:Repositorio Institucional Séneca
dc.identifierrepourl:https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/8728299
dc.description.abstractAntecedentes: A medida que más estudios reportan sobre las preferencias del paciente, se necesitan técnicas para identificar, evaluar y eventualmente sintetizar los resultados de un conjunto de diversas metodologías. El determinar valores y preferencias brindan resultados valiosos para los clínicos y tomadores de decisiones. El objetivo de la investigación fue describir los instrumentos y/o técnicas para determinar los valores y preferencias de los pacientes con asma, para el tratamiento con corticosteroides inhalados. Métodos: Se incluyeron en esta revisión estudios aleatorizados y no aleatorizados que hayan reportado técnicas e instrumentos para determinar valores y preferencias de los pacientes con asma para el tratamiento con corticosteroides inhalados solos o combinados. Se realizaron búsquedas en las bases de datos de MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS y CENTRAL hasta agosto del 2022. El riesgo de sesgo se evaluó utilizando la herramienta RoB recomendada por el grupo GRADE. Los resultados se presentaron de forma tabular y en una síntesis narrativa. Resultados: Veintitrés estudios (n=13,457) se incluyeron en la revisión. Los resultados de la investigación indican que la mayoría de los reportes de valores y preferencias relacionados con el tratamiento del asma para corticosteroides inhalados, evalúan la importancia relativa de los atributos; siendo el experimento de elección discreta, el método más frecuentemente utilizado entre los estudios incluidos. Los atributos de eficacia, seguridad y costos fueron determinantes en la elección del tratamiento. Discusión: Las limitaciones incluyen la falta de pautas para llevar a cabo estudios de preferencias y la dificultad para comparar los resultados de los estudios. El conocimiento sobre los métodos para obtener información sobre los valores y preferencias de los pacientes con asma, en particular para el tratamiento con corticosteroides inhalados, es limitado. Los resultados de este estudio pueden ser un recurso importante, para establecer los principales métodos para determinar los valores y preferencias para el tratamiento controlador con corticosteroides inhalados de pacientes con asma.
dc.languagespa
dc.publisherUniversidad de los Andes
dc.publisherMaestría en Epidemiología
dc.publisherMaestría en Salud Pública
dc.publisherFacultad de Medicina
dc.publisherEscuela de Gobierno Alberto Lleras Camargo
dc.relationBurney P, Jarvis D, Perez-Padilla R. The global burden of chronic respiratory disease in adults. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2015;19(1):10-20.
dc.relationEllwood P ESA, El-Tigany M, et al. The Global Asthma Report 2011. Paris, France: The International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease; 2011.
dc.relationLai CK, Beasley R, Crane J, Foliaki S, Shah J, Weiland S, et al. Global variation in the prevalence and severity of asthma symptoms: phase three of the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC). Thorax. 2009;64(6):476-83.
dc.relationSembajwe G, Cifuentes M, Tak SW, Kriebel D, Gore R, Punnett L. National income, self- reported wheezing, and asthma diagnosis from the World Health Survey. Eur Respir J. 2010; 35 (2):279-86.
dc.relationUniversity of York. NHS Centre for Reviews Dissemination. Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness: CRD's guidance for those carrying out or commissioning reviews: NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York; 2001.
dc.relationBahadori K, Doyle-Waters MM, Marra C, Lynd L, Alasaly K, Swiston J, et al. Economic burden of asthma: a systematic review. BMC Pulm Med. 2009; 9:24.
dc.relationGuyatt GH, Feeny DH, Patrick DL. Measuring health-related quality of life. Ann Intern Med. 1993 Apr 15;118(8):622-9. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-118-8-199304150-00009. PMID: 8452328.
dc.relationFeehan M, Ranker L, Durante R, Cooper DK, Jones GJ, Young DC, et al. Adherence to controller asthma medications: 6-month prevalence across a US community pharmacy chain. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2015;40(5):590-3.
dc.relationGamble J, Stevenson M, McClean E, Heaney LG. The prevalence of nonadherence in difficult asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2009; 180(9):817-22.
dc.relationChapman S, Dale P, Svedsater H, Stynes G, Vyas N, Price D, et al. Modelling the effect of beliefs about asthma medication and treatment intrusiveness on adherence and preference for once-daily vs. twice-daily medication. NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2017; 27(1):61.
dc.relationYepes-Núñez, J. J., & García García, H. I. (2011). Preferencias de estados de salud y medidas de utilidad. Iatreia, 24(4), 365-377.
dc.relationBowling, A., & Ebrahim, S. (2001). Measuring patients' preferences for treatment and perceptions of risk. BMJ Quality & Safety, 10(suppl 1), i2-i8.
dc.relationSoekhai, V., Whichello, C., Levitan, B., Veldwijk, J., Pinto, C. A., Donkers, B., & de Bekker- Grob, E. W. (2019). Methods for exploring and eliciting patient preferences in the medical product lifecycle: a literature review. Drug discovery today, 24(7), 1324-1331.
dc.relationKew KM, Malik P, Aniruddhan K, Normansell R. Shared decision-making for people with asthma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017; 10:CD012330.
dc.relationBereza BG, Troelsgaard Nielsen A, Valgardsson S, Hemels ME, Einarson TR. Patient preferences in severe COPD and asthma: a comprehensive literature review. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015; 10:739-44.
dc.relationRincon-Montaña M, Rosselli D. Dispositivos de inhalación para asma y EPOC: una revisión de la literatura. 2019; 31(1).
dc.relationBai F, Ling J, Esoimeme G, Yao L, Wang M, Huang J, et al. A systematic review of questionnaires about patient's values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2018; 12:2309-23.
dc.relationCumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Chandler J, Welch VA, Higgins JP, et al. Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019; 10: ED000142.
dc.relationGuyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2008;336(7650):924-6.
dc.relationPage M J, McKenzie J E, Bossuyt P M, Boutron I, Hoffmann T C, Mulrow C D et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews BMJ 2021; 372 :n71 doi:10.1136/bmj.n7
dc.relationSpencer AJ, Eldredge JD. Roles for librarians in systematic reviews: a scoping review. J Med Libr Assoc. 2018; 106(1):46-56.
dc.relationCampbell M, McKenzie J E, Sowden A, Katikireddi S V, Brennan S E, Ellis S et al. Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: reporting guideline BMJ 2020; 368 :l6890 doi:10.1136/bmj.l6890
dc.relationBien DR, Danner M, Vennedey V, Civello D, Evers SM, Hiligsmann M. Patients¿ preferences for outcome, process and cost attributes in cancer treatment: a systematic review of discrete choice experiments. Patient Patient-Cent Outcomes Res. 2017; 10(5):553¿65.
dc.relationHauber AB, González JM, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG, Prior T, Marshall DA, Cunningham C, et al. Statistical methods for the analysis of discrete choice experiments: a report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2016;19:300¿15.
dc.relationZhang Y, Alonso Coello P, Guyatt G, et al. GRADE Guidelines: 19. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences¿risk of bias and indirectness. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019; 111:94-104.
dc.relationZhang Y, Alonso-Coello P, Guyatt GH, Yepes-Nuñez JJ, Akl EA, Hazlewood G, Pardo- Hernandez H, Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta I, Qaseem A, Williams JW Jr, Tugwell P, Flottorp S, Chang Y, Zhang Y, Mustafa RA, Rojas MX, Schünemann HJ. GRADE Guidelines: 19. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-Risk of bias and indirectness. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Jul;111:94-104. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.01.013. Epub 2018 Feb 13. PMID: 29452223.
dc.relationHardy, J., Baggott, C., Fingleton, J., Reddel, H. K., Hancox, R. J., Harwood, M., ... & Porrachia, A. C. (2019). Budesonide-formoterol reliever therapy versus maintenance budesonide plus terbutaline reliever therapy in adults with mild to moderate asthma (PRACTICAL): a 52-week, open-label, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet, 394(10202), 919-928.
dc.relationBaggott, C., Reddel, H. K., Hardy, J., Sparks, J., Holliday, M., Corin, A,& Fingleton, J. (2020). Patient preferences for symptom-driven or regular preventer treatment in mild to moderate asthma: findings from the PRACTICAL study, a randomised clinical trial. European Respiratory Journal, 55(4).
dc.relationBaggott, C., Hansen, P., Hancox, R. J., Hardy, J. K., Sparks, J., Holliday, M & Fingleton, J. (2020). What matters most to patients when choosing treatment for mild¿moderate asthma? Results from a discrete choice experiment. Thorax, 75(10), 842-848.
dc.relationBalsbaugh, T. A., Chambers, C. V., & Diamond, J. J. (1999). Asthma controller medications: what do patients want? Journal of Asthma, 36(7), 591-596.
dc.relationConnett, G. J., Warde, C., Wooler, E., & Lenney, W. (1993). Use of budesonide in severe asthmatics aged 1-3 years. Archives of disease in childhood, 69(3), 351-355.
dc.relationHauber, A. B., Mohamed, A. F., Johnson, F. R., Meddis, D., Wagner, S., & O¿Dowd, L. (2009, March). Quantifying asthma patient preferences for onset of effect of combination inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta2-agonist maintenance medications. In Allergy Asthma Proc (Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 139-47).
dc.relationHaughney, J., Fletcher, M., Wolfe, S., Ratcliffe, J., Brice, R., & Partridge, M. R. (2007). Features of asthma management: quantifying the patient perspective. BMC Pulmonary Medicine, 7(1), 1-9.
dc.relationJohansson, G., Sta, B., Tornling, G., Andersson, S., Karlsson, G. S., Fa, K., & Berggren, F. (2004). Asthma treatment preference study: a conjoint analysis of preferred drug treatments. Chest, 125(3), 916-923.
dc.relationLancsar, E. J., Hall, J. P., King, M., Kenny, P., Louviere, J. J., Fiebig, D. G., ... & Jenkins, C. R. (2007). Using discrete choice experiments to investigate subject preferences for preventive asthma medication. Respirology, 12(1), 127-136.
dc.relationLloyd, A., McIntosh, E., Rabe, K. F., & Williams, A. (2007). Patient preferences for asthma therapy: a discrete choice experiment. Primary Care Respiratory Journal, 16(4), 241-248.
dc.relationLloyd, A., Doyle, S., Dewilde, S., & Turk, F. (2008). Preferences and utilities for the symptoms of moderate to severe allergic asthma. The European journal of health economics, 9, 275-284.
dc.relationMcTaggart-Cowan, H. M., Shi, P., FitzGerald, J. M., Anis, A. H., Kopec, J. A., Bai, T. R., ... & Lynd, L. D. (2008). An evaluation of patients' willingness to trade symptom-free days for asthma-related treatment risks: a discrete choice experiment. Journal of Asthma, 45(8), 630-638.
dc.relationNakanishi, Y., Iwamoto, H., Miyamoto, S., Nakao, S., Higaki, N., Yamaguchi, K., ... & Hattori, N. (2022). Association Between Patient Preference for Inhaler Medications and Asthma Outcomes. Journal of Asthma and Allergy, 1539-1547.
dc.relationTervonen, T., Hawken, N., Hanania, N. A., Martinez, F. J., Heidenreich, S., & Gilbert, I. (2020). Maintenance inhaler therapy preferences of patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a discrete choice experiment. Thorax, 75(9), 735-743.
dc.relationTervonen, T., Martinez, F. J., Hanania, N. A., Heidenreich, S., Eudicone, J. M., & Gilbert, I. (2021). Dual-combination maintenance inhaler preferences in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A patient-centered benefit-risk assessment. Respiratory Medicine, 176, 106278
dc.relationUmeda, A., Yamane, T., Mochizuki, T., Inoue, Y., Tsushima, K., Miyagawa, K., ... & Fukunaga, K. (2019). Real-world efficacy and problems of once-daily use of inhaled steroid (fluticasone furoate) combined with long-acting beta-2 agonist (vilanterol) in Japanese patients with asthma. Cogent Medicine, 6(1), 1600632.
dc.relationLaba, T. L., Reddel, H. K., Zwar, N. J., Marks, G. B., Roughead, E., Flynn, A., ... & Jan, S. (2019). Does a Patient-Directed financial incentive affect patient choices about controller medicines for asthma? a discrete choice experiment and financial impact analysis. Pharmacoeconomics, 37, 227-238.
dc.relationLloyd, A., McIntosh, E., Williams, A. E., Kaptein, A., & Rabe, K. F. (2008). How does patients¿ quality of life guide their preferences regarding aspects of asthma therapy? A patient-preference study using discrete-choice experiment methodology. The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 1, 309-316.
dc.relationPrice, D., Lee, A., Sims, E. et al. Characteristics of patients preferring once-daily controller therapy for asthma and COPD: a retrospective cohort study. Prim Care Respir J 22, 161¿ 168 (2013). https://doi-org.ezproxy.uniandes.edu.co/10.4104/pcrj.2013.00017
dc.relationSvedsater, H., Leather, D., Robinson, T., Doll, H., Nafees, B., & Bradshaw, L. (2017). Evaluation and quantification of treatment preferences for patients with asthma or COPD using discrete choice experiment surveys. Respiratory Medicine, 132, 76-83.
dc.relationSEO, J., ZHANG, S., KRUCIEN, N., SLADE, D. J., CZIRA, A., TRENNERY, C., & HEIDENREICH, S. (2022). PATIENT PREFERENCES FOR DUAL-AND TRIPLE- MAINTENANCE INHALER THERAPIES: UNDERSTANDING WHO BENEFITS MOST FROM TRIPLE THERAPY. Chest, 162(4), A1950-A1951.
dc.relationHanania, N. A., Tervonen, T., Hawken, N., Gilbert, I., Heidenreich, S., & Martinez, F. J. (2019). Disease Status Affects Symptomatic Patients' Preferences for Maintenance Inhaler Therapies: Discrete Choice Experiment. In B37. NOVEL APPROACHES TO ASTHMA MANAGEMENT AND OUTCOMES (pp. A3035-A3035). American Thoracic Society.
dc.relationBerggren, F., Ställberg, B., Tornling, G., Fält, K., Andersson, S., Karlsson, G., & Johansson, G. (2003). VV5 ASTHMA TREATMENT PREFERENCE STUDY¿A CONJOINT ANALYSIS OF PREFERRED DRUG TREATMENTS. Value in Health, 6(6), 611.
dc.relationMartinez, F. J., Tervonen, T., Hawken, N., Gilbert, I., Heidenreich, S., & Hanania, N. A. (2019). Quantifying Symptomatic Patients' Preferences for Maintenance Inhaler Therapies: Discrete Choice Experiment. In D22. REAL WORLD MEDICATION USE IN PULMONARY DISEASES (pp. A5923-A5923). American Thoracic Society.
dc.relationSvedsater, H., Roberts, J., Patel, C., Macey, J., Hilton, E., & Bradshaw, L. (2016). A qualitative study of patient preferences for maintenance therapy in COPD ¿ discrepancies between clinical priorities and social context. BMC pulmonary medicine, 16(1), 78. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-016-0245-1
dc.relationLouviere JJ, Hensher DA, Swait JD. Stated choice methods: analysis and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
dc.relationSoekhai V, de Bekker-Grob EW, Ellis AR, Vass CM. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: past, present and future. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37(2):201¿26.
dc.relationSimons, G., Caplan, J., DiSantostefano, R. L., Veldwijk, J., Englbrecht, M., Bywall, K. S., ... & Falahee, M. (2022). Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations. Arthritis Research & Therapy, 24(1), 1-12.
dc.relationCollacott H, Zhang D, Heidenreich S, Tervonen T. A Systematic and Critical Review of Discrete Choice Experiments in Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Patient. 2022 Jan; 15(1):55-68. doi: 10.1007/s40271-021-00536-w. Epub 2021 Jul 12. Erratum in: Patient. 2021 Aug 23;: PMID: 34250574; PMCID: PMC8738458.
dc.relationVeldwijk J, Groothuis-Oudshoorn C, Kihlbom U, Langenskiöld S, Dekker E, Kallenberg F, et al. How psychological distance of a study sample in discrete choice experiments affects preference measurement: a colorectal cancer screening case study. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2019; 13:273¿82.
dc.relationLe, Q. A., Doctor, J. N., Zoellner, L. A., and Feeny, N. C. (2018). Effects of treatment, choice, and preference on health-related quality-of-life outcomes in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).Qual. Life Res., 27, 1555¿1562. doi: 10.1007/s11136-018-1833-4.
dc.relationDelevry, D., and Le, Q. A. (2019). Effect of treatment preference in randomized controlled trials: systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Patient-Patient-Center. Outcom. Res. 12, 1¿17. doi: 10.1007/s40271-019-00379-6
dc.relationGlobal strategy for asthma management and prevention. (s/f). Ginasthma.org. Recuperado el 24 de mayo de 2023, de https://ginasthma.org/wp- content/uploads/2022/07/GINA-Main-Report-2022-FINAL-22-07-01-WMS.pdf
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional
dc.rightshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rightshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.titleRevisión sistemática de la literatura de valores y preferencias de los pacientes con asma para la toma de decisiones de salud.
dc.typeTrabajo de grado - Maestría


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución