IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v13y2020i2d10.1007_s40271-019-00403-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tapering Biologic Therapy for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Qualitative Study of Patient Perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Suz Jack Chan

    (University of Otago)

  • Lisa K. Stamp

    (University of Otago)

  • Nicola Liebergreen

    (University of Otago
    University of Otago)

  • Henry Ndukwe

    (University of Otago)

  • Carlo Marra

    (University of Otago)

  • Gareth J. Treharne

    (University of Otago)

Abstract

Background and objective Biologic therapies are cost effective for active rheumatoid arthritis but have adverse effects and are costly. Tapering of biologics is emerging as an important consideration when sustained remission is achieved. Recent trials have highlighted the clinical feasibility of tapering, but there is little evidence on how proposed tapering would be received by patients. The aim of this study was to explore factors influencing hypothetical decisions of patients with rheumatoid arthritis on tapering their biologics and their perspectives on remission and flare when considering the possibility of tapering. Methods Patients with rheumatoid arthritis with diverse experiences of biologics with different modes of administration were purposively sampled to participate in one of six focus groups (n = 43) or an individual interview (n = 2). Transcripts were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Results Five overarching themes on what influences a participant’s decision to taper their biologic were identified. First, participants were fearful of uncertain outcomes of tapering, especially flare and joint damage. Second, participants prioritized quality of life from continuing biologics over the risk of adverse effects. Third, tapering biologics was seen as providing relief from the inconvenience of taking biologics regularly. Fourth, participants wanted assurance of prompt access to healthcare if their rheumatoid arthritis were to flare when tapering. Fifth, preferences for involvement in decision making varied, but fulfilling information needs was desired to aid a patient’s preferred role in decision making on tapering. Conclusions This study provides novel insight into the perspectives of patients with rheumatoid arthritis on tapering biologics when sustained remission is achieved at a crucial juncture in global affordability for healthcare systems. These patient perspectives can inform the planning of decision aids and clinical trials of decision-making processes when tapering is proposed.

Suggested Citation

  • Suz Jack Chan & Lisa K. Stamp & Nicola Liebergreen & Henry Ndukwe & Carlo Marra & Gareth J. Treharne, 2020. "Tapering Biologic Therapy for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Qualitative Study of Patient Perspectives," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 13(2), pages 225-234, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:13:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s40271-019-00403-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-019-00403-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-019-00403-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-019-00403-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Melanie J. Cozad & Lisa C. Lindley & Kaitlyn Crosby & Noor Alshareef & Ann Blair Kennedy & Gulzar Merchant & Pam Evans & Ronnie D. Horner, 2023. "Patient Goals for Living with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Qualitative Study," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 32(1), pages 40-48, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:13:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s40271-019-00403-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.