| Title |
Perspectives and experiences of Dutch multiple sclerosis patients and multiple sclerosis-specialized neurologists on injectable disease-modifying treatment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s106155 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Leo H Visser, Marco A Heerings, Peter J Jongen, Karin van der Hiele |
| Abstract |
The adherence to treatment with injectable disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) in multiple sclerosis (MS) may benefit from adequate information provision and management of expectations. The communication between patients and physicians is very important in this respect. The current study investigated the perspectives and experiences of the MS patients and neurologists concerning the choice and course of treatment with DMDs in the Netherlands. The MS patients (aged 18-60 years; diagnosed with MS at least a year ago, currently treated with injectable DMD treatment) and MS-specialized neurologists (practicing for ≥3 years, treating ≥15 MS patients/month on average, and spending >60% of their time in clinical practice) were asked to complete semistructured Internet-based questionnaires. The neurologists in this study were not necessarily the treating neurologists of the participating MS patients. In all, 107 MS patients and 18 MS-specialized neurologists completed the questionnaires. The MS-specialized neurologists in this study reported discussing most of the suggested treatment goals with their patients. The MS patients indicated that certain important treatment goals, ie, reduction in disease progression, reduction or prolongation of time to long-term disability, and reduction in new magnetic resonance imaging lesions, were not discussed with them. More than one-quarter of the patients (27%) would appreciate more information about their treatment. We found evidence for suboptimal patient adherence to MS therapy (23% indicated taking a treatment break) due to diverse side effects, lack of efficacy, or practical issues. As compared to these patient reports, the scale of poor adherence was overestimated by more than half of the neurologists (on average, 30% estimated treatment breaks). The MS patients and MS-specialized neurologists in this study differ in their experiences and perspectives on information provision and adherence to DMDs. Education programs and up-to-date information on MS treatments for both neurologists and patients may be helpful in improving patient involvement and patient-physician communication. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Qatar | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 12% |
| Researcher | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 13 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 9 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 15 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 May 2016.
All research outputs
#3,052,978
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#147
of 1,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,489
of 315,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#7
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,696 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.