A qualitative study exploring the general population’s perception of rheumatoid arthritis after being informed about disease adaptation

McTaggart-Cowan, H and O'Cathain, A and Tsuchiya, A and Brazier, J (2009): A qualitative study exploring the general population’s perception of rheumatoid arthritis after being informed about disease adaptation.

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to gain an understanding of what factors induce individuals to alter their opinions about a health condition after being informed about disease adaptation and being given time to reflect and deliberate on this information. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) states are used as an illustration. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 members of the general population. They completed two time trade-off exercises for three RA states and underwent an adaptation exercise (AE) which consisted of listening to recordings of patients discussing how they adapted to RA. Also included was a structured discussion to encourage the participant to reflect on how the patients have adapted. Participants were shown their own health state values, as well as patient values. Findings: After being informed about disease adaptation and reflecting on the information, participants were more likely to consider adaptation and alter their opinions of RA if they were able to empathise with the patients in the AE. This enabled individuals to feel that they could cope by reflecting on their experience of RA in family and friends, by drawing on others for support if they had RA, and by having a positive attitude towards life. Conclusions: The results demonstrate that there is a range of reasons for which people change their perceptions about RA; this requires further exploration.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: health state valuation; qualitative research; quality of life; disease adaptation
• Subjects: I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I3 - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty > I31 - General Welfare, Well-Being; I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I1 - Health > I19 - Other

References

Brazier J, Akehurst R, Brennan A, Dolan P, Claxton K, McCabe C, Sculpher M, Tsuchiya A (2005). Should patients have a greater role in valuing health states? Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 4(4):201-8.

Cappelli M, Surh L, Humphreys L, Verma S, Logan D, Hunter A, Allanson J (2001). Measuring women’s preferences for breast cancer treatments and BRCA1/BRCA2 testing. Quality of Life Research 10:595-607.

Clarke JA, Rieker P, Propert KJ, Talcott JA (1999). Changes in quality of life following treatment for early prostate cancer. Urology 53:161-8.

Damschroder LJ, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA (2005). The impact of considering adaptation in health state valuation. Social Science and Medicine 61:267-77.

Damschroder LJ, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA (2008). Considering adaptation in preference elicitation. Health Psychology 27(3):394-9.

DIPEx. Personal experiences of health and illness [online] 2007. Available from URL: http://www.dipex.org/arthritis [Accessed: 27 April 2007].

Gold MR, Siegal JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC (eds) (1996). Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Happich M, von Legerke T (2005). Valuing the health state "tinnitus": Differences between patients and the general public. Hearing Research 207:50-8.

Kahneman D, Snell J. Predicting utility. In: Hogarth RAM (ed) (2000). Insights in decision making. (pp. 673-693). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lee TL, Ziegler JK, Sommi R, Sugar C, Mahmoud R, Lenert LA (2000). Comparison of preferences for health outcomes in schizophrenia among stakeholder groups. Journal of Psychiatric Research 34:201-10.

McTaggart-Cowan H, Brazier J, Tsuchiya A (2008). Combining Rasch and cluster analyses: A novel method for developing health states for use in valuation studies. School of Health and Related Research: Health Economics and Decision Science Discussion Paper, 08/15.

Menzel P, Dolan P, Richardson J, Olsen JA (2002). The role of adaptation to disability and disease in health state valuation: a preliminary normative analysis. Social Science and Medicine 55:2149-58.

National Institute for Clinical Excellence (2003). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence.

Ritchie J, Spencer L (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess R (eds), Analyzing qualitative data. (pp. 173-197). London: Routledge.

Tijhuis GJ, Jansen SJT, Stiggelbout AM, Zwinderman AH, Hazes JMW (2000). Value of the time trade off method for measuring utilities in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Annuals of Rheumatic Diseases 59:892-7.

Ubel PA, Loewenstein G, Jepson C (2005). Disability and sunshine: can hedonic predictions be improved by drawing attention to focusing illusions or emotional adaptation? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 11(2):111-23.