Change in what matters to palliative patients: Eliciting information about adaptation with SEIQoL-DW

This study was carried out to investigate the usefulness of the SEIQoL-DW to elicit information about response shifts in palliative patients. The instrument measures individual quality of life and allows respondents to choose, rate and weight important areas of life (cues). We explored patients' reconceptualizations (ie, change in cues) and their value change (ie, change of cues weights). Results of 21 patients showed what mattered to these patients and how they had adjusted to deteriorating health. There is a risk that repeated measurements do not provide all the information that is potentially present and relevant to explore response shifts. But clear instructions to interviewers, such as careful listening, probing self-evident cues such as health and family, and accurate recording of cues on the forms may overcome this risk. Future research is recommended to explore the possibilities of regular assessments to facilitate better adjustment of patients

Patient Perspectives on Novel Treatments in Haemophilia: A Qualitative Study

Background and Objective: New treatments for haemophilia are under development or entering the market, including extended half-life products, designer drugs and gene therapy, thereby increasing treatment options for haemophilia. It is currently unknown how people with haemophilia decide whether to switch to a new treatment. Therefore, the objective of this study was to explore what factors may play a role when Dutch patients and parents of boys with moderate or severe haemophilia make decisions about whether to switch to a different treatment, and how disease and treatment characteristics may affect these decisions. This may aid clinical teams in tailored information provision and shared decision making. Methods: We conducted interviews among adults with moderately severe or severe haemophilia and parents of young boys with severe haemophilia. We aimed to include participants from a variety of backgrounds in terms of involvement in the haemophilia community, age, treatment centre and treatments. Participants were recruited through the Netherlands Haemophilia Society and a haemophilia treatment centre. Semi-structured interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic content analysis was used to analyse the data. Results: Twelve people with haemophilia and two mothers of boys with haemophilia were included. In general, participants reported to be satisfied with their current treatment. However, they considered ease of use of the medication (fewer injections, easier handling, alternative administration) an added value of new treatments. Participants were aware of the high cost of coagulation factor products and some expressed their concern about the Netherlands Haemophilia Society’s long-term willingness to pay for current and novel treatments, especially for increased usage due to high-risk activities. Participants also expressed their concerns about the short- and long-term safety of new treatments and believed the effects of gene therapy were not yet fully understood. Participants expected their treatment team to inform them when a particular new treatment would be suitable for them. Conclusions: With the number of treatment options set to increase, it is important for healthcare providers to be aware of how patient experiences shape patients’ decisions about new therapies