Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Feb 17:15:359-373.
doi: 10.2147/PPA.S289692. eCollection 2021.

Treatment Satisfaction, Patient Preferences, and the Impact of Suboptimal Disease Control in a Large International Rheumatoid Arthritis Cohort: SENSE Study

Affiliations

Treatment Satisfaction, Patient Preferences, and the Impact of Suboptimal Disease Control in a Large International Rheumatoid Arthritis Cohort: SENSE Study

Peter C Taylor et al. Patient Prefer Adherence. .

Abstract

Background: Patients' needs and perspectives are important determinants of treatment success in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Assessing patients' perspectives can help identify unmet needs and enhance the understanding of treatment benefits.

Objective: The SENSE study assessed the impact of inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) on treatment satisfaction, disease outcomes, and patient perspectives related to RA disease management.

Methods: SENSE was a noninterventional, cross-sectional study conducted in 18 countries across Europe, Asia, and South America. Adult patients with poorly controlled RA of moderate/high disease activity were eligible. Patient satisfaction was assessed by the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM v1.4). Treatment adherence, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), quality of life (QoL), work ability, digital health literacy (DHL), patient preference information, and treatment strategy were also assessed.

Results: A total of 1624 patients were included in the study: most were female (84.2%) and middle-aged, and mean disease duration was 10.5 years. Mean TSQM global satisfaction subscore was 60.9, with only 13.5% of patients reporting good treatment satisfaction (TSQM global ≥80). The strongest predictor of good treatment satisfaction was treatment with advanced therapies. Most patients (87.4%) reported good treatment adherence. In general, patients had impaired QoL and work ability, high HRU, and 67.4% had poor DHL. Leading treatment expectations were "general improvement of arthritis" and "less joint pain". Most patients preferred oral RA medications (60.7%) and rapid (≤1 week) onset of action (71.1%). "Increased risk for malignancies" and "increased risk for cardiovascular disease" were the least acceptable side effects. Despite suboptimal control, advanced therapies were only used in a minority of patients, and DMARD switches were planned for only half of the patients.

Conclusion: Suboptimal disease control negatively impacts treatment satisfaction, work ability, QoL, and HRU. Data collected on patient perspectives may inform shared decision-making and optimize treat-to-target strategies for improving patient outcomes in RA.

Keywords: adherence; digital health literacy; patient preference; rheumatoid arthritis; treatment satisfaction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Peter C. Taylor received research grants, consultation, and/or speaking fees from AbbVie, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Fresenius, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Sanofi, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB; Codrina Ancuta received consultation and/or speaker fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Merck Sharpe and Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB; Andrey Gordeev received speaker fees from AbbVie; Radka Janková received speaker fees from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharpe and Dohme, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB; Umut Kalyoncu received consultation and/or speaker fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB; Jadranka Morović-Vergles received speaker fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Merck Sharpe and Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB; Mariana Peixoto G. U. e Silva de Souza received research grants from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GSK, Pfizer, and UCB; honoraria for consultancies and/or speaking engagements from AbbVie, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB; and is a Member of RA commission – Brazilian Society of Rheumatology and vice-president of SMR (Regional Society of Rheumatology); Prodromos Sidiropoulos received research grants, consultation, and/or speaking fees from AbbVie, Amgen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB; Atsushi Kawakami received speaker fees from AbbVie GK., Actelion Pharmaceuticals Japan Ltd., Asahi Kasei Pharma Corporation., Astellas Pharma Inc, Celltrion Healthcare Co., Ltd., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Daiichi Sankyo Co., Eisai Co., Eli Lilly Japan, GlaxoSmithKline K.K., Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K., Kowa Co., Ltd., MedPeer Inc, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Co., Novartis Pharma Inc, ONO Pharmaceutical Co., Taisho Pharma Co., Ltd., Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., and Pfizer Japan Inc; and grants and research support from AbbVie GK., Actelion Pharmaceuticals Japan Ltd., Asahi Kasei Pharma Corporation, Astellas Pharma Inc, AYUMI Pharmaceutical Co., Boehringer Ingelheim Japan, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion Healthcare Co., Ltd., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Daiichi Sankyo Co., Eisai Co., Eli Lilly Japan, Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., MSD K.K., Neopharma Japan Co., Ltd., Novartis Pharma Inc, ONO Pharmaceutical Co., Sanofi K.K., Taisho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Takeda Science Foundation, and Teijin Pharma Co. Orsolya Nagy and Ivan Lagunes-Galindo are employees of AbbVie and may own stock or options in AbbVie. No relevant conflicts of interest were declared by María C. de la Vega and Bernadette Rojkovich. The authors report no other conflicts of interest related to this work. Some of the data from this paper were presented at the EULAR 2020 Congress as a poster presentation (SAT0123). The poster’s abstract was published in the “Scientific Abstracts” section in Annals of Rheumatic Diseases (Taylor et al Ann Rheum Dis 2020; 79:996–997; https://ard.bmj.com/content/79/Suppl_1/996).

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Mode of action for planned DMARD switches.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication subscores.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Patients’ expectations for RA treatments.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Patients’ preferences for RA treatments: (A) route of administration, drug combinations, and time to effect; (B) acceptability of potential side effects of RA treatments.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Patients’ need for patient support programs.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Yu C, Jin S, Wang Y, et al. Remission rate and predictors of remission in patients with rheumatoid arthritis under treat-to-target strategy in real-world studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rheumatol. 2019;38(3):727–738. doi:10.1007/s10067-018-4340-7 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Batko B, Batko K, Krzanowski M, Żuber Z. Physician adherence to treat-to-target and practice guidelines in rheumatoid arthritis. J Clin Med. 2019;8:9. doi:10.3390/jcm8091416 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Louder AM, Singh A, Saverno K, et al. Patient preferences regarding rheumatoid arthritis therapies: a conjoint analysis. Am Health Drug Benefits. 2016;9(2):84–93. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ho MP, Gonzalez JM, Lerner HP, et al. Incorporating patient-preference evidence into regulatory decision making. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(10):2984–2993. doi:10.1007/s00464-014-4044-2 - DOI - PubMed
    1. FDA guidance: guidance on patient preference information in premarket approval applications, humanitarian device exemption applications, and de novo requests. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/.... Accessed August24, 2016

LinkOut - more resources