Development of a patient journey map for people living with cervical dystonia.

BACKGROUND: Patient journey maps are increasingly used as a tool that enables healthcare providers to refine their service provision to best meet patient needs. We developed a cervical dystonia patient journey map (CDPJM) that describes the holistic patient experience from pre-diagnosis through to long-term treatment. METHODS: The CDPJM was developed in 2 stages; a patient survey (open questions and multichoice) of 15 patients with CD was conducted to inform the design of the CDPJM, which was then refined and validated by an expert-patient focus group. RESULTS: Qualitative analysis of the patient survey supported five key stages of the patient journey: symptom onset, diagnosis and therapeutic relationship with healthcare professionals, initiation of care for CD, start of CD treatment, and living with treated CD. Following symptom onset, survey respondents described having multiple visits to their family doctor who prescribed strong pain killers and muscle relaxants and referred their patient to up to 10 different specialists for diagnosis. Over half (53.3%) of respondents had received ≥ 1 misdiagnosis. Respondents reported relief at having a diagnosis but a lack of understanding of the prognosis and treatment options; 46.7% said their neurologist did not spend enough time addressing their concerns. Survey respondents reported using a variety of alternative sources of information, including the internet (86.7%), self-help groups (66.7%) and information leaflets provided by health care professionals (60.0%). While botulinum toxin (BoNT) was consistently discussed as the main treatment option, some neurologists also mentioned physiotherapy, counselling, and other complementary approaches. However, patients were often left to seek complementary services themselves. Patients reported a 'rollercoaster' of relief with BoNT treatment with symptoms (and subsequent impact on daily life) returning towards the end of an injection cycle. "When BoNT works well I can return to an almost normal life … when the injections stop working so well, I have to rest more and avoid going to work and experience life restrictions." CONCLUSIONS: We present the first patient journey map for CD that can be used to guide local service mapping and to compare current provision with what patients say they want and need.

Co-creating with patients an impact framework across the medicine's life cycle: a qualitative study exploring patients' experiences of involvement in and perceptions of impact measures.

BACKGROUND: The biopharmaceutical industry is challenged with efficiently delivering medicines that patients truly value. This can be addressed by engaging patients and caregivers throughout a medicine's life cycle, ensuring that products meet the needs and expectations of those who take them. While isolated best practice examples of patient engagement exist, they remain relatively ad hoc and not fully embedded within Research & Development (R&D) practices. To encourage more patient engagement, the 'impact' of patient engagement projects (PEP) must be objectively measured and demonstrated. Some frameworks have been proposed; however, there is no evidence of widespread adoption, nor have patients' perspectives been robustly explored. The objective of this qualitative study was therefore to understand patients' perspectives of impact measurement that can be systematically applied within a biopharmaceutical company. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 patient organisation (PO) representatives exploring their experiences of engagement and reflections on 23 candidate patient engagement impact measures categorised into five groups: Medicines R&D Priorities; Clinical Trial Design; Regulatory & Market Access Submissions; Product Support & Information; and Disease Support & Information. Thematic analysis was undertaken and impact measures revised in line with interview participant feedback. Emerging themes and revisions to impact measures were validated at a joint workshop with 4 patient advisors representing 4 POs. RESULTS: The study revealed that PO representatives feel a deep sense of accomplishment and ownership when collaborating on PEPs with biopharmaceutical companies. They largely conceptualise 'impact' as positive, tangible and useful outcomes. The revisions made to the pre-defined patient engagement impact measures fell into three broad categories: (1) a requirement for greater context; (2) capturing the nature of patient influence; and (3) terminology changes. The greatest number of revisions concerned 'requiring greater context', for example, including additional descriptions, patient quotes, and satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: This study sheds light on how patient advocates view 'impact'. Typically this means delivering 'value' important for them. Therefore, the authors of this paper created the term 'value-impact' to comprehensively characterise this conceptualisation, and propose a value-impact measurement plan, incorporating longitudinal data. Through this understanding and in light of other recently published work, wide-scale adoption and implementation of the measurement of value-impact across the biopharmaceutical industry can be realised.

Developing medicines involves multiple stages, all essential for pharmaceutical companies. However, this approach is becoming increasingly costly and patients are rarely involved in defining treatment outcomes. Patient insight is important for everyone involved in medicinal development and required by authorities reviewing new treatments. To identify best practices, the difference ('impact') made by engaging with patients must be measured continuously throughout the treatment development process. Possible impact measures have been proposed (for example, the PARADIGM initiative), but problems remain.This study aimed to work with patients and adapt standard measuring approaches that can be used to provide ongoing insight into the impact of patient engagement activities for companies and patients. Researchers interviewed 13 patient organisation (PO) representatives to explore their experiences of impact measures. Thematic analysis was conducted, and data used to adapt 23 potential impact measures in collaboration with patients.This study identified that PO representatives view impact as being positive, tangible, and useful outcomes, achieving a deep sense of accomplishment and ownership for those patients and representatives involved. The authors created the term 'value-impact' to describe how patients perceive such achievements. Furthermore, measures should be adapted to: 1) include greater context such as descriptions, patients quotes and satisfaction; 2) capture patient influence; and 3) use language that is understandable for all parties. Examples and suggestions for engagement at different stages and revised impact measures are presented in this report. It is our hope that this study will encourage more frequent and effective use of patient engagement strategies as medicines are developed.