Patient Values and Preferences for Managing Acute Dental Pain Elicited through Online Deliberation

Author:

Dawson T.1ORCID,Pahlke S.2,Carrasco-Labra A.3ORCID,Polk D.4ORCID

Affiliation:

1. The Art of Democracy, LLC, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

2. Infectious Diseases Society of America, Arlington, VA, USA

3. Department of Preventive and Restorative Sciences and Center for Integrative Global Oral Health, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

4. University of Pittsburgh School of Dental Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Abstract

Introduction: Patient values and preferences (PVP) are among multiple sources of information panelists synthesize when developing clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Patient and public involvement (PPI) can be critical for learning PVP; however, the methodology for engaging patients in CPG development is lacking. Deliberative engagement is effective for obtaining public views on complex topics that require people to consider ethics, values, and competing perspectives. Objective: Elicit comprehensive understanding of PVP concerning oral analgesics for managing acute dental pain consecutive to toothache and simple and surgical dental extractions, with consideration of associated outcomes, both desirable and undesirable. Methods: Multistage engagement involving 2 electronic surveys and a 90-min online small group deliberative engagement. Adults who have experienced acute dental pain deliberated about 3 hypothetical scenarios stratified according to expected pain intensity, completed a postdeliberation survey, and validated a PVP statement developed by researchers based on review of qualitative data from deliberations and quantitative data from surveys. Results: Participants affirmed the PVP statement reflected their small group deliberations and their individual views. Most indicated that pain relief is critical to deciding which pain relief medicine they would want regardless of expected pain level. Most also identify as critical concerns about substance abuse or misuse, although many believe it unlikely that they will experience these outcomes over the brief prescription timeframe for acute dental pain. Participants identified agency in decision-making, consultation including “better communication” of options, and treatment actions tailored to life circumstances as key values. Conclusions: Participants preferred nonprescription and nonopioid pain relief options. As expected pain levels increased, more participants expressed willingness to accept opioids, but more also mentioned rescue analgesia as a third outcome critical to decision-making. Online deliberative method provided opportunities for obtaining informed perspectives. Guideline developers and policymakers may find online deliberations useful for eliciting PVP related to health outcomes. Knowledge Transfer Statement: Study results informed the US Food and Drug Administration–funded clinical practice guideline on the management of acute dental pain. Findings may be a resource for clinicians in decision-making conversations with patients regarding expectations for pain relief and positive and negative outcomes of differing pain relief medications. Further research should pursue applicability of online deliberative engagement as a method to elicit patient values and preferences.

Funder

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Dentistry

Reference24 articles.

1. Using thematic analysis in psychology

2. Thematic analysis.

3. Carman KL, Heeringa JW, Heil SKR, Garfinkel S, Windham A, Gilmore D, Ginsburg M, Sofaer S, Gold M, Pathak-Sen E. 2013. The use of public deliberation in eliciting public input: findings from a literature review. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

4. Carman KL, Maurer M, Mallery C, Wang G, Garfinkel S, Richmond J, Gilmore D, Windham A, Yang M, Mangrum R, et al. 2014. Community forum deliberative methods demonstration: evaluating effectiveness and eliciting public views on use of evidence. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3