Factors affecting overall care experience for people living with rare conditions in the UK: exploratory analysis of a quantitative patient experience survey.

BACKGROUND: Although individually rare, collectively, rare conditions are common and affect a large number of people and are often chronic, life threatening and affect multiple body systems; the majority of them have no effective treatment. The literature has identified many specific challenges for those living with rare conditions, however, we do not know which of these in combination are most likely to impact how someone rates their overall experience of care. The aim of this study is to do further exploratory analysis of the Genetic Alliance UK 2020 Rare Experience survey data to identify which variables are most strongly associated with respondents' overall care experience. RESULTS: There were strong associations between most of the selected survey variables and the overall rated experience of care variable. In the multiple linear regression only nine variables remained in the best fit model: 'Trust and confidence in hospital staff involved in ongoing care'; 'Satisfaction with information provided by healthcare professionals-following diagnosis'; 'The professionals providing care work as a team'; 'Feel care is coordinated effectively'; 'The timing and frequency of appointments are convenient for the patient/carer/family'; 'Whether or not there is a specific healthcare professional to ask questions of about the rare/undiagnosed condition'; 'Experience of searching for a diagnosis'; 'Knowledge of whether there is a specialist centre for the condition'; and 'Number of different clinics attend for the condition'. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate the challenges that play the largest part in explaining the varied experiences with rare disease healthcare in the UK for our survey respondents. These challenges should be further investigated with a broader sample of people affected by rare conditions, ideally through the implementation of a comprehensive national rare condition patient registry. Our findings highlight an important potential gap in the Framework, 'trust and confidence in healthcare professionals'; further research is required to fully understand the foundations of trust and confidence.

Mental health care for rare disease in the UK - recommendations from a quantitative survey and multi-stakeholder workshop.

BACKGROUND: Rare disease patients and carers report significant impacts on mental health but studies on UK populations have focussed on relatively few, specific conditions. Collectively rare conditions represent a substantial health burden, with an estimated 3.5 million affected individuals in the UK. METHOD: We explored the impact on mental health of living with a rare condition, and experiences of health service support, through an online survey. The survey assessed the impact of specific experiences commonly reported by those affected by a rare condition through multiple choice questions and Likert scale items, and open text question boxes. Through a multi-stakeholder workshop that involved facilitated discussion of our findings with patients/carers, clinicians and a government advisor, we developed recommendations for policy and practice toward a more person-centred and integrated approach. RESULTS: Eligible responses came from 1231 patients and 564 carers. Due to their rare condition, the majority of respondents (> 90%) had felt worried/anxious; stressed; and /or low/depressed. Thirty-six percent of patients and 19% of carers had had suicidal thoughts. Challenges that are particular to rare conditions and which negatively affect mental health included limited knowledge of the condition amongst healthcare professionals (88%), and not being believed or taken seriously by them. Only 23% of respondents felt healthcare professionals considered mental and physical health as equally important. Almost half reported never having been asked about mental health by healthcare professionals. Our findings indicate that access to, and appropriateness of, professional psychological support needs to be improved. Peer group support is important but signposting is inadequate. Our recommendations are for healthcare professionals to be supported to effectively and sensitively recognise and address patients' and carers' mental health needs; and for service level coordination of care to integrate professional psychological support with rare disease services. CONCLUSION: Living with a rare disease substantially impacts mental health. Many of the drivers of poor mental health reflect issues specific to managing rare conditions. To meet UK government commitments, there should be a focus on empowering healthcare professionals who treat rare disease patients and on integration of mental health support with rare disease services.

Rare musculoskeletal diseases in adults: a research priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

BACKGROUND: Osteogenesis imperfecta, fibrous dysplasia/McCune-Albright syndrome and X-linked hypophosphatemia are three rare musculoskeletal diseases characterised by bone deformities, frequent fractures and pain. Little high-quality research exists on appropriate treatment and long-term management of these conditions in adults. This is further worsened by limited research funding in rare diseases and a general mismatch between the existing research priorities and those of the patients. This partnership adopted the James Lind Alliance approach to identify the top 10 research priorities for rare musculoskeletal diseases in adults through joint patient, carer and healthcare professional collaboration. RESULTS: The initial survey for question collection recruited 198 respondents, submitting a total of 988 questions. 77% of the respondents were patients with a rare musculoskeletal disease. Following out-of-scope question exclusion, repeating query grouping and scientific literature check for answers, 39 questions on treatment and long-term management remained. In the second public survey, 220 respondents, of whom 85% were patients with a rare musculoskeletal disease, their carers, relatives or friends, prioritised these uncertainties, which allowed selection of the top 25. In the last stage, patients, carers and healthcare professionals gathered for a priority setting workshop to reach a consensus on the final top 10 research priorities. These focus on the uncertainties surrounding appropriate treatment and holistic long-term disease management, highlighting several aspects indirect to abnormal bone metabolism, such as extra-skeletal symptoms, psychological care of both patients and their families and disease course through ageing. CONCLUSIONS: This James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership is the first to investigate rare bone diseases. The priorities identified here were developed jointly by patients, carers and healthcare professionals. We encourage researchers, funding bodies and other stakeholders to use these priorities in guiding future research for those affected by rare musculoskeletal disorders.

Strengthening international patient advocacy perspectives on patient involvement in HTA within the HTAi Patient and Citizen Involvement Interest Group - Commentary.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is an evidence-based decision-making process, focusing on evaluating health technologies for funding within a healthcare system. 'Health technologies' include medications, medical devices, diagnostics, medical procedures and services. Health Technology Assessment international (HTAi) is a global society for those who produce, use, participate in, or encounter HTA. The HTAi Secretariat supports special interest groups within HTAi. One such special interest group, the Patient and Citizen Involvement in HTA Interest Group (PCIG), focuses on strengthening patient involvement in HTA. PCIG's members are from HTA agencies, research, industry, and patient organisations. We describe the steps PCIG has taken to form an international panel of patient advocates (the Patient Panel) as an autonomous group within its governance structure that reports directly to the PCIG Steering Committee. The Patient Panel was established in order to strengthen meaningful patient involvement in HTA by working co-productively with other PCIG members to develop resources accessible to patient organisations. Patient advocates known to be active within HTA in their own countries were invited to form the inaugural group, with one person appointed to chair the group for the first year. Documentation had been prepared to inform potential members and set out potential roles as seen by the Steering Committee. The appointed Patient Panel is defining its own terms of reference, goals and objectives. The Panel Chair is a member of the PCIG Steering Committee, and is mentored by the retiring PCIG chair. A registry of activities is part of monitoring and evaluation. ABSTRACT: Background Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is an evidence-based decision-making process, focusing on evaluating health technologies for funding within a healthcare system or medical insurance system. 'Health technologies' are understood broadly, and include medications, medical devices, diagnostics, medical procedures and services. Health Technology Assessment international (HTAi) is a global society for those who produce, use, participate in, or encounter HTA. The HTAi Secretariat supports special interest groups within HTAi, including the Patient and Citizen Involvement in HTA Interest Group (PCIG), which focuses on strengthening patient involvement in HTA. PCIG's members come from HTA agencies, research, industry, and patient organisations. Main body We describe the steps the PCIG has taken to form an international panel of patient advocates as an autonomous group within its governance structure, reporting directly to the PCIG Steering Committee. Patient advocates known to be active within HTA in their own countries were invited to form the inaugural group. One person was invited to chair the Panel for the first year of its operation, based on the candidate's experience of working across diseases and countries, and being new to HTAi. Documentation was prepared to inform potential members of the Panel and set out potential roles as seen by the Steering Committee. The Panel came into being in March 2016 and is now setting out its own working principles, goals and objectives. The Panel Chair is a member of the PCIG Steering Committee, and is mentored by the previous PCIG chair. A registry of activities has been set up as part of monitoring and evaluation. The Patient Panel is intended to provide a focus within the PCIG for patient advocates to work among themselves and co-productively through the PCIG Working Groups to develop mutual understanding and strengthen meaningful patient involvement in HTA internationally. Patient advocates can benefit from a clear understanding the evidence requirements within HTA and how information can be effectively presented by patient groups to decision-making bodies. Conclusion The HTAi Patient and Citizen Involvement Interest Group has set up a Patient Panel consisting of patient advocates. The intent is to work co-productively to advance patient involvement in HTA.