ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1045

The Potential Value of a Shared Decision-Making Intervention for Choices Regarding Triple Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Nick Bansback1, Tima Mohammadi2, Aslam Anis3, James R. O'Dell4 and Glen Hazlewood5, 1School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 3University of British Columbia, School of Population and Public Health, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 4Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 5Division of Rheumatology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

Meeting: 2017 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Date of first publication: September 18, 2017

Keywords: Decision analysis, economics and patient preferences

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Monday, November 6, 2017

Title: Health Services Research Poster II: Osteoarthritis and Rheumatoid Arthritis

Session Type: ACR Poster Session B

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: Previous studies have shown that using Triple Therapy (a combination of 3 generic drugs) prior to a biologic, is the most cost-effective strategy for patients with rheumatoid arthritis. While studies also find that many patients would prefer to trial Triple Therapy prior to a biologic, fewer than 5% of patients do so in the US. We determined the potential value of an intervention that promotes informed shared decision-making between patients and clinicians around triple therapy use after failure of methotrexate.

Methods: We developed an economic model that compared a strategy where patient preferences for triple therapy use were integrated into treatment decisions, versus usual care. A previous study suggests that 59% of patients would choose triple therapy first if provided the comparative evidence of benefits, potential adverse events and dosing schedule. We assumed a cost of $50 for a shared decision making intervention such as a patient decision aid. Patient’s trialling triple therapy first were assumed to switch to a sequence of biologics upon withdrawal. We extrapolated the influence of the initial treatment decision on subsequent disease progression, resource use such as hospitalizations, quality of life, mortality and Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Various sensitivity analyses were performed. A scenario that incorporated the value patients assign to the process of shared decision-making was also considered.

Results: Incorporating patient preferences into the decision was estimated to reduce average costs for a patient by $40,000 over a lifetime through delaying the introduction of biologic therapy. Even under the most pessimistic assumptions regarding the potential for earlier biologic use delaying joint erosions, only 0.08 QALYs (28 days of full health) over a lifetime were estimated to be lost. The consequent incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for usual care vs the patient preference strategy is over $500,000/QALY. Sensitivity analysis supported this finding. Incorporating the process of shared decision-making offsets the negative QALYs, implying the patient preference strategy saves costs and increases QALYs.

Conclusion: This study demonstrates that systematically giving patients with rheumatoid arthritis who fail methotrexate an informed choice between triple therapy and a biologic as the initial treatment is cost-saving and can even provide more ‘benefits’ to the patient. This strategy allows patients who prefer biologic therapy to choose it, but saves costs by delaying the biologic initiation in patients who choose triple therapy first. The results suggest that strategies used elsewhere for increasing shared decision-making such as building infrastructure for implementing patients decision aids, or introducing fee codes for shared decision-making, could be cost-effective and should be explored to promote value based prescribing in rheumatology.


Disclosure: N. Bansback, None; T. Mohammadi, None; A. Anis, None; J. R. O'Dell, Medac, 5,Coherus, 5; G. Hazlewood, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Bansback N, Mohammadi T, Anis A, O'Dell JR, Hazlewood G. The Potential Value of a Shared Decision-Making Intervention for Choices Regarding Triple Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017; 69 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/the-potential-value-of-a-shared-decision-making-intervention-for-choices-regarding-triple-therapy-in-rheumatoid-arthritis/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2017 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/the-potential-value-of-a-shared-decision-making-intervention-for-choices-regarding-triple-therapy-in-rheumatoid-arthritis/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology