Rheumatoid Arthritis: Bogardus S

Fraenkel L, Bogardus S, Concato J, Felson D. · VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, Connecticut 06520-8031, USA. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #12610798 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: Some people believe that certain issues should be protected from all trade-offs. These issues are referred to as "protected values." We investigated whether some patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treat the risk of adverse effects (AE) as "protected values," i.e., as unacceptable regardless of how small the risk. METHODS: Patients with RA rated willingness to risk 17 different AE on a visual analog scale, where 0 = not willing under any circumstances and 100 = definitely willing. Participants then rated willingness to take medication as the risk of each AE was progressively decreased by 2 levels from its actual risk, using a 5 level scale ranging from 10 in 100 to 1 in 100,000. RESULTS: Between 32% and 39% of participants were not more willing to accept a risk of AE causing reversible cosmetic changes (e.g., acne), between 35% and 47% were not more willing to accept a risk of AE causing reversible discomfort (e.g., rash), and between 41% and 45% were not more willing to accept a risk of AE causing potential irreversible damage (e.g., pneumonitis) as the probability of each of these AE was substantially decreased. Unwillingness to accept risk of toxicity was especially evident for cancer, where 66% of patients refused to accept a risk of cancer occurring in 1 in 100,000 persons. CONCLUSION: Among patients particularly concerned with the risk of drug toxicity, many remain unwilling to accept the risk of AE even when their probability is decreased to levels far below their actual risk. These results suggest that patients may treat particularly worrisome AE as protected values, which may lead to poor decision-making in clinical practice.

Fraenkel L, Bogardus S, Concato J, Felson D. · Department of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, VA Connecticut Health Care System, West Haven, CT 06516, USA. · Rheumatology (Oxford). · Pubmed #11934960 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient willingness to accept the risk of adverse effects (AEs) commonly associated with arthritis medications. METHODS: Rheumatoid arthritis patients were asked to rate their willingness to take a medication associated with 17 specific AEs using a visual analogue scale. RESULTS: We interviewed 100 patients. Eighty-one were currently using one or more disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and 29 had previously experienced AEs related to DMARDs. Seventy-five stated that they were doing very well or well with respect to their arthritis compared with other people their age. Thirty-five per cent of those interviewed were unwilling to accept the risk of cosmetic changes, 38% were unwilling to accept the risk of temporary discomfort and 45% were unwilling to accept the risk of major toxicity. Patients who had previously experienced AEs were more willing to accept the risk of cosmetic changes (83 vs. 58%, P=0.02), temporary discomfort (79 vs. 55%, P=0.02) and major toxicity (83 vs. 44%, P=0.001) compared with those who had not previously experienced AEs. CONCLUSIONS: Many rheumatoid arthritis patients are very concerned about potential drug toxicity. However, risk adversity appeared to be attenuated by past experience with AEs. Our results suggest that certain patients, especially those with milder disease activity, might be reluctant to accept commonly used arthritis medications if they are fully informed of their potential toxicity.

Fraenkel L, Bogardus S, Concato J, Felson D. · Department of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520-8031, USA. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #11324776 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To quantify preference for disclosure of information among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to examine sex-specific correlates of information preference. METHODS: We interviewed patients with RA and assessed preference for disclosure of information using 4 questions from the previously validated "Information Preference Seeking Scale." Three questions addressed preference for disclosure of side effects and 1 question addressed preference for disclosure of therapeutic options. Associations between preference for information and patient characteristics were examined using stepwise multiple linear regression. RESULTS: One hundred RA patients (mean age 68+/-12 years; 73% female) were interviewed; 89 respondents agreed or strongly agreed with all 4 statements reflecting a preference for full disclosure, and an additional 8 respondents agreed or strongly agreed with 3 of the 4 statements. The mean score (+/- SD) for information preference was 86+/-13, on a scale from 0 to 100 where 100 reflected a strong preference for full disclosure. In bivariate analyses, female sex and current employment were associated with stronger preferences for being informed (mean score for women 88+/-11, for men 80+/-15 [P = 0.02]; for employed 92+/-11, for unemployed 84+/-13 [P = 0.04]). Multivariate sex-specific analyses demonstrated that current employment and higher education level were positively associated with preference for disclosure among women and men, respectively. CONCLUSION: The results of our survey suggest that RA patients want to be fully informed about the risks associated with medications and about alternative options. The challenge remaining for rheumatologists is how to effectively communicate the risks and benefits related to the many options that are currently available for RA patients.