Treatment preference archetypes in eosinophilic esophagitis and their implications for therapy

Joy W. Chang,Kelcie Brophy,Kerry A. Ryan,Joel H. Rubenstein,Evan S. Dellon,Lauren P. Wallner,Hyungjin Myra Kim,Raymond De Vries
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14309/ajg.0000000000003133
2024-10-19
The American Journal of Gastroenterology
Abstract:BACKGROUND: Little is known about how patients make decisions about and prioritize, therapies and disease management in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to systematically identify and characterize patient perspectives and attitudes that influence decision making for EoE management. METHODS: To understand the diverse attitudes and values of EoE patients, we designed a study using the Q-method. We iteratively developed 31 statements related to EoE disease management. Participants sorted statements by ranking from +4 (most agree) to -4 (most disagree). By-person factor analysis, using 2- and 3- factor rotation, revealed distinct preference archetypes. RESULTS: Thirty-four adults with EoE (mean age 40.9, 51.4% male, 82.9% White) were recruited from gastroenterology and allergy clinics from a single center. We identified two treatment-centered archetypes: Medication preference, driven by symptoms and the desire to minimize risk of complications, and Natural treatment preference, focusing on identifying trigger foods and diet adherence. Three-factor analysis revealed an additional archetype: Treatment ambivalent, a view of EoE as a mild and episodic (not chronic) disease with low priority to treat. Comparison by factor revealed 54% of those in the natural preference archetype were recategorized as treatment ambivalent, suggesting that they see natural treatment as a less complicated or milder strategy and may be at risk of nonadherence and reduced treatment uptake. CONCLUSIONS: We identified three distinct treatment preference archetypes among individuals with EoE, underscoring the need for personalized treatment strategies, especially for those favoring natural approaches but masking ambivalence, and may be at risk for nonadherence or loss to follow-up.
gastroenterology & hepatology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?