How to integrate research evidence on patient preferences in pharmaceutical coverage decisions and clinical practice guidelines: A qualitative study among Dutch stakeholders

- We examine CPG and coverage decisions in relation to evidence on patient preferences.
- Stakeholders hold different definitions and conceptualisations of the term preferences.
- Several issues need attention when integrating evidence on patient preferences.

Despite the increasing number of research publications on patient preferences, their use in healthcare policy-making is limited. Integrating research evidence on patient preferences in policy-making is advocated by some, but several issues are put forward as well. There has been no systematic investigation of the stakeholders' view on this matter so far. Objective is to explore the opinions of Dutch stakeholders on how to integrate evidence on patient preferences in pharmaceutical coverage decisions and clinical practice guideline (CPG) development, and which issues may be encountered.MethodsQualitative study with semi-structured interviews with Dutch researchers (N = 7), policy-makers and CPG developers (N = 4) and patient representatives (N = 4) involved in pharmaceutical coverage decisions and/or CPG development. The interview scheme focused on the definition of patient preferences; how to integrate evidence on patient preferences in decision-making; and barriers and facilitators.ResultsRespondents mentioned various barriers and facilitators for integration, of conceptual, normative, procedural, methodological and practical nature. There is also variety in the terms and definitions used for preferences, complicating searching and synthesising evidence. It is not clear how to integrate evidence on patient preferences in different decision contexts, and what weight preferences should have in relation to other decision criteria.ConclusionsThis study revealed important issues that need guidance when integrating evidence on patient preferences in healthcare policy decisions.