School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia; 2206 E Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 1Z3, Canada.
Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University; Blusson Hall, Room, 11300, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, Canada; British Columbia Cancer Research Centre, 675 W 10th Avenue; Vancouver, British Columbia, V5Z 1L3, Canada.
Soc Sci Med. 2023 Jul;328:115999. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.115999. Epub 2023 May 29.
From the perspectives of patients and caregivers, the objectives were: identifying which result presentations, describing work productivity loss (WPL) outcomes, are most understandable; measuring which presentations are important to report; and investigating which WPL outcomes are viewed as important alongside clinical trials results.
We used a four phased, sequential mixed methods design, guided by patient-oriented research engaging one patient partner. We conducted think-aloud interviews, in British Columbia/Canada, to review WPL results and our survey measuring the understandability and importance of the results, and importance of each WPL outcome. We surveyed a sample representing working Canadians. The findings were summarized and analyzed using linear and logistic regression. We conducted sub-group analyses; one was gender based. All regressions were conducted using generalized estimating equations.
In our qualitative phases, 20 patients and caregivers were interviewed. Participants recommended for the results to be brief, simple, and represented visually. Then, 118 patients and 120 caregivers were surveyed. The results presented in days or cost yielded the highest understandability and importance to report. All WPL outcomes were identified as important to somewhat important to report by most. The associations indicated that the more understandable the result presentation was, the more likely it was to be rated as important. Age was the only factor significantly associated with selecting days or cost as the most important result.
Presenting WPL results in days and cost, using lay terms and visual supports, were viewed as easiest to understand and most important to report in clinical trials by patients and caregivers. Our findings are supportive of clinical trials standardizing the measurement of WPL to include all of its outcomes (absenteeism, presenteeism, employment status changes and total work productivity loss), in addition to tools assessing the comprehensiveness of WPL results to be provided to patients and caregivers.
从患者和照护者的角度来看,目标是:确定哪些结果呈现方式最易于理解,描述工作生产力损失(WPL)结果;衡量哪些呈现方式重要;并调查哪些 WPL 结果与临床试验结果一样重要。
我们采用了四阶段、顺序混合方法设计,由参与患者导向研究的一名患者伙伴指导。我们在不列颠哥伦比亚省/加拿大进行了出声思维访谈,以审查 WPL 结果和我们衡量结果可理解性和重要性以及每个 WPL 结果重要性的调查。我们调查了一个代表加拿大工作人群的样本。使用线性和逻辑回归对研究结果进行总结和分析。我们进行了亚组分析;其中一个是基于性别的。所有回归均使用广义估计方程进行。
在我们的定性阶段,采访了 20 名患者和照护者。参与者建议将结果呈现得简洁、简单,并以视觉方式呈现。然后,对 118 名患者和 120 名照护者进行了调查。以天数或成本呈现的结果具有最高的可理解性和报告重要性。大多数患者和照护者认为所有 WPL 结果都需要报告,而且认为其重要性程度在重要到有些重要之间。关联表明,结果呈现方式越容易理解,就越有可能被评为重要。年龄是唯一与选择天数或成本作为最重要结果显著相关的因素。
患者和照护者认为以天数和成本呈现 WPL 结果,使用通俗易懂的术语和视觉支持,是临床试验中最易于理解和最重要的报告方式。我们的研究结果支持临床试验将 WPL 的测量标准化,包括所有结果(缺勤、在职工作生产力损失、就业状态变化和总工作生产力损失),以及为患者和照护者提供评估 WPL 结果全面性的工具。