Alignment between outcomes and minimal clinically important differences in the Dutch type 2 diabetes mellitus guideline and healthcare professionals’ preferences
Abstract To evaluate the clinical benefit of new medicines for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), the Dutch guideline committee T2DM in primary care established the importance of outcomes and minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs). The present study used an online questionnaire to investigat...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2021-05-01
|
| Series: | Pharmacology Research & Perspectives |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.750 |
| _version_ | 1819063419163115520 |
|---|---|
| author | Marloes Dankers Marjorie H. J. M. G. Nelissen‐Vrancken Bertien H. Hart Anke C. Lambooij Liset vanDijk Aukje K. Mantel‐Teeuwisse |
| author_facet | Marloes Dankers Marjorie H. J. M. G. Nelissen‐Vrancken Bertien H. Hart Anke C. Lambooij Liset vanDijk Aukje K. Mantel‐Teeuwisse |
| author_sort | Marloes Dankers |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract To evaluate the clinical benefit of new medicines for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), the Dutch guideline committee T2DM in primary care established the importance of outcomes and minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs). The present study used an online questionnaire to investigate healthcare professionals’ opinions about the importance of outcomes and preferences for MCIDs. A total of 211 physicians, pharmacists, practice nurses, diabetes nurses, nurse practitioners and physician assistants evaluated the importance of mortality, macro‐ and microvascular morbidity, HbA1c, body weight, quality of life, (overall) hospital admissions and severe and other hypoglycemia on a 9‐point scale. All outcomes were considered critical (mean scores 7–9), except for body weight and other hypoglycemia (mean scores 4–6). Only HbA1c and hospital admissions were valued differently by the guideline committee (not critical). Other relevant outcomes according to the respondents were adverse events, ease of use and costs. Median MCIDs were 4 mmol/mol for HbA1c (guideline: 5 mmol/mol) and 3 kg for body weight (guideline: 5 kg weight gain and 2,5 kg weight loss). Healthcare professionals preferred relative risk reductions of 20% for mortality (guideline: 10%) and macrovascular morbidity (guideline: 25%) and 50% for other hypoglycaemia (guideline: 25%). The MCID of 25% for microvascular morbidity, hospital admissions and severe hypoglycaemia corresponded to the guideline‐MCID. Healthcare professionals’ preferences were thus comparable to the views of the guideline committee. However, healthcare professionals had a stricter view on the importance of HbA1c and hospital admissions and the MCIDs for mortality and other hypoglycemia. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-21T15:14:22Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-79f163b6da50473ca958c073a183a335 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2052-1707 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-21T15:14:22Z |
| publishDate | 2021-05-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Pharmacology Research & Perspectives |
| spelling | doaj.art-79f163b6da50473ca958c073a183a3352022-12-21T18:59:11ZengWileyPharmacology Research & Perspectives2052-17072021-05-0193n/an/a10.1002/prp2.750Alignment between outcomes and minimal clinically important differences in the Dutch type 2 diabetes mellitus guideline and healthcare professionals’ preferencesMarloes Dankers0Marjorie H. J. M. G. Nelissen‐Vrancken1Bertien H. Hart2Anke C. Lambooij3Liset vanDijk4Aukje K. Mantel‐Teeuwisse5Dutch Institute for Rational Use of Medicine Utrecht the NetherlandsDutch Institute for Rational Use of Medicine Utrecht the NetherlandsDepartment of General Practice Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care University Medical Center UtrechtUtrecht University Utrecht the NetherlandsDutch Institute for Rational Use of Medicine Utrecht the NetherlandsDepartment of PharmacoTherapy, ‐Epidemiology and ‐Economics (PTEE Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy Faculty of Science and Engineering University of Groningen Groningen the NetherlandsDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPSUtrecht University Utrecht the NetherlandsAbstract To evaluate the clinical benefit of new medicines for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), the Dutch guideline committee T2DM in primary care established the importance of outcomes and minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs). The present study used an online questionnaire to investigate healthcare professionals’ opinions about the importance of outcomes and preferences for MCIDs. A total of 211 physicians, pharmacists, practice nurses, diabetes nurses, nurse practitioners and physician assistants evaluated the importance of mortality, macro‐ and microvascular morbidity, HbA1c, body weight, quality of life, (overall) hospital admissions and severe and other hypoglycemia on a 9‐point scale. All outcomes were considered critical (mean scores 7–9), except for body weight and other hypoglycemia (mean scores 4–6). Only HbA1c and hospital admissions were valued differently by the guideline committee (not critical). Other relevant outcomes according to the respondents were adverse events, ease of use and costs. Median MCIDs were 4 mmol/mol for HbA1c (guideline: 5 mmol/mol) and 3 kg for body weight (guideline: 5 kg weight gain and 2,5 kg weight loss). Healthcare professionals preferred relative risk reductions of 20% for mortality (guideline: 10%) and macrovascular morbidity (guideline: 25%) and 50% for other hypoglycaemia (guideline: 25%). The MCID of 25% for microvascular morbidity, hospital admissions and severe hypoglycaemia corresponded to the guideline‐MCID. Healthcare professionals’ preferences were thus comparable to the views of the guideline committee. However, healthcare professionals had a stricter view on the importance of HbA1c and hospital admissions and the MCIDs for mortality and other hypoglycemia.https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.750clinical relevancediabetes mellitus type 2healthcare professionalsMCIDoutcomespreferences |
| spellingShingle | Marloes Dankers Marjorie H. J. M. G. Nelissen‐Vrancken Bertien H. Hart Anke C. Lambooij Liset vanDijk Aukje K. Mantel‐Teeuwisse Alignment between outcomes and minimal clinically important differences in the Dutch type 2 diabetes mellitus guideline and healthcare professionals’ preferences Pharmacology Research & Perspectives clinical relevance diabetes mellitus type 2 healthcare professionals MCID outcomes preferences |
| title | Alignment between outcomes and minimal clinically important differences in the Dutch type 2 diabetes mellitus guideline and healthcare professionals’ preferences |
| title_full | Alignment between outcomes and minimal clinically important differences in the Dutch type 2 diabetes mellitus guideline and healthcare professionals’ preferences |
| title_fullStr | Alignment between outcomes and minimal clinically important differences in the Dutch type 2 diabetes mellitus guideline and healthcare professionals’ preferences |
| title_full_unstemmed | Alignment between outcomes and minimal clinically important differences in the Dutch type 2 diabetes mellitus guideline and healthcare professionals’ preferences |
| title_short | Alignment between outcomes and minimal clinically important differences in the Dutch type 2 diabetes mellitus guideline and healthcare professionals’ preferences |
| title_sort | alignment between outcomes and minimal clinically important differences in the dutch type 2 diabetes mellitus guideline and healthcare professionals preferences |
| topic | clinical relevance diabetes mellitus type 2 healthcare professionals MCID outcomes preferences |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.750 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT marloesdankers alignmentbetweenoutcomesandminimalclinicallyimportantdifferencesinthedutchtype2diabetesmellitusguidelineandhealthcareprofessionalspreferences AT marjoriehjmgnelissenvrancken alignmentbetweenoutcomesandminimalclinicallyimportantdifferencesinthedutchtype2diabetesmellitusguidelineandhealthcareprofessionalspreferences AT bertienhhart alignmentbetweenoutcomesandminimalclinicallyimportantdifferencesinthedutchtype2diabetesmellitusguidelineandhealthcareprofessionalspreferences AT ankeclambooij alignmentbetweenoutcomesandminimalclinicallyimportantdifferencesinthedutchtype2diabetesmellitusguidelineandhealthcareprofessionalspreferences AT lisetvandijk alignmentbetweenoutcomesandminimalclinicallyimportantdifferencesinthedutchtype2diabetesmellitusguidelineandhealthcareprofessionalspreferences AT aukjekmantelteeuwisse alignmentbetweenoutcomesandminimalclinicallyimportantdifferencesinthedutchtype2diabetesmellitusguidelineandhealthcareprofessionalspreferences |