Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research

Innovation by patients with rare diseases and chronic needs

Authors: Pedro Oliveira, Leid Zejnilovic, Helena Canhão, Eric von Hippel

Published in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

We provide the first empirical exploration of disease-related innovation by patients and their caregivers. Our aims were to explore to what degree do patients develop innovative solutions; how many of these are unique developments; and do these solutions have positive perceived impact on the patients’ overall quality of life? In addition, we explored the factors associated with patient innovation development, and sharing of the solutions that the patients developed.

Methods

We administered a questionnaire via telephone interviewing to a sample of 500 rare disease patients and caregivers. The solutions reported were pre-screened by the authors for their fit with the self-developed innovation aim of the study. All the reported solutions were then validated for their novelty by two medical professionals. Logistic regression models were used to test the relationships between our key variables, patient innovation and solution sharing.

Results

263 (53%) of our survey respondents reported developing and using a solution to improve management of their diseases. An initial screening removed 81 (16%) solutions for being an obvious misfit to the self-developed innovation aim of the study. This lowered the sample of potentially innovative solutions to 182 (36%). Assessment of novelty and usefulness of the solutions, conducted by two medical evaluators, confirmed that 40 solutions (8%) were indeed novel, while the remaining 142 (28%) were already known to medicine. The likelihood of patient innovation increased as the education level increased (OR 2, p < 0.05), and as their perception of limitations imposed by their disease increased (OR 1.3, p < 0.05). 55 individuals diffused their solutions to some degree, with 50 of these sharing via direct diffusion to other patients. There is a positive relationship between the impact of a solution on the respondents’ overall quality of life and likelihood of solution sharing.

Conclusions

Given that hundreds of millions of people worldwide are afflicted by rare diseases, patient and their caregivers can be a tremendous source of innovation for many who are similarly afflicted. Our findings suggest that many patients could be greatly assisted by improved diffusion of known solutions and best practices to and among patients and their caregivers.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Westermark K, Holm BB, Söderholm M, Llinares-Garcia J, Rivière F, Aarum S, et al. European regulation on orphan medicinal products: 10 years of experience and future perspectives. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2011;10:341–9.CrossRefPubMed Westermark K, Holm BB, Söderholm M, Llinares-Garcia J, Rivière F, Aarum S, et al. European regulation on orphan medicinal products: 10 years of experience and future perspectives. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2011;10:341–9.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Song P, Gao J, Inagaki Y, Kokudo N, Tang W. Rare diseases, orphan drugs, and their regulation in Asia: current status and future perspectives. Intractable Rare Dis Res. 2012;1(1):3–9.PubMedCentralPubMed Song P, Gao J, Inagaki Y, Kokudo N, Tang W. Rare diseases, orphan drugs, and their regulation in Asia: current status and future perspectives. Intractable Rare Dis Res. 2012;1(1):3–9.PubMedCentralPubMed
4.
go back to reference Griggs RC, Batshaw M, Dunkle M, Gopal-Srivastava R, Kaye E, Krischer J, et al. Clinical research for rare disease: opportunities, challenges, and solutions. Mol Genet Metab. 2009;96:20–6.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed Griggs RC, Batshaw M, Dunkle M, Gopal-Srivastava R, Kaye E, Krischer J, et al. Clinical research for rare disease: opportunities, challenges, and solutions. Mol Genet Metab. 2009;96:20–6.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
5.
go back to reference Acemoglu D, Linn J. Market size in innovation: theory and evidence from the pharmaceutical industry. Q J Econ. 2004;119(August):1049–90.CrossRef Acemoglu D, Linn J. Market size in innovation: theory and evidence from the pharmaceutical industry. Q J Econ. 2004;119(August):1049–90.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference von Hippel E, de Jong JPJ, Flowers S. Comparing business and household sector innovation in consumer products: findings from a representative study in the United Kingdom. Manage Sci. 2012;58:1669–81.CrossRef von Hippel E, de Jong JPJ, Flowers S. Comparing business and household sector innovation in consumer products: findings from a representative study in the United Kingdom. Manage Sci. 2012;58:1669–81.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Ogawa S, Pongtanalert K. Visualizing invisible innovation continent: evidence from global consumer innovation surveys. 2011. Available at SSRN 1876186. Ogawa S, Pongtanalert K. Visualizing invisible innovation continent: evidence from global consumer innovation surveys. 2011. Available at SSRN 1876186.
9.
go back to reference Oliveira P, von Hippel E. Users as service innovators: the case of banking services. Res Policy. 2011;40:806–18.CrossRef Oliveira P, von Hippel E. Users as service innovators: the case of banking services. Res Policy. 2011;40:806–18.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference van der Boor P, Oliveira P, Veloso F. Unusual suspects? Innovation by users in developing countries: evidence from mobile banking services. Res Policy. 2014;43(9):1594–607.CrossRef van der Boor P, Oliveira P, Veloso F. Unusual suspects? Innovation by users in developing countries: evidence from mobile banking services. Res Policy. 2014;43(9):1594–607.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Dyson E. Why participatory medicine? J Particip Med. 2009;1:1–5. Dyson E. Why participatory medicine? J Particip Med. 2009;1:1–5.
12.
go back to reference Ferguson T. E-patient: how they can help us heal healthcare. 2007 Ferguson T. E-patient: how they can help us heal healthcare. 2007
13.
go back to reference Hibbard J, Stockard J, Mahoney ER, Tusler M. Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Serv Res. 2004;39(4 Pt 1):1005–26.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed Hibbard J, Stockard J, Mahoney ER, Tusler M. Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Serv Res. 2004;39(4 Pt 1):1005–26.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
14.
go back to reference Rozenblum R, Bates DW. Patient-centred healthcare, social media and the internet: the perfect storm? BMJ Qual Saf. 2013;22:183–6.CrossRefPubMed Rozenblum R, Bates DW. Patient-centred healthcare, social media and the internet: the perfect storm? BMJ Qual Saf. 2013;22:183–6.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Frydman G. Patient-driven research: rich opportunities and real risks. J Particip Med. 2009;1:6–10. Frydman G. Patient-driven research: rich opportunities and real risks. J Particip Med. 2009;1:6–10.
16.
go back to reference Habicht H, Oliveira P, Shcherbatiuk V. User innovators: when patients set out to help themselves and end up helping many. Die Unternehmung. 2012;66:277–94.CrossRef Habicht H, Oliveira P, Shcherbatiuk V. User innovators: when patients set out to help themselves and end up helping many. Die Unternehmung. 2012;66:277–94.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Oliveira P, Canhão H. Users as service innovators: evidence from banking to healthcare. In: Lakhani K, Harhoff D, editors. Revolutionizing innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2015. Oliveira P, Canhão H. Users as service innovators: evidence from banking to healthcare. In: Lakhani K, Harhoff D, editors. Revolutionizing innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2015.
18.
go back to reference Kuenne C, Akenroye T, Moeslein K. Online innovation intermediaries in healthcare. In: European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS) 2013 Proceedings. 2013. Kuenne C, Akenroye T, Moeslein K. Online innovation intermediaries in healthcare. In: European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS) 2013 Proceedings. 2013.
19.
go back to reference ISO. Assistive products for persons with disability — classification and terminology. Geneve: ISO; 2011. ISO. Assistive products for persons with disability — classification and terminology. Geneve: ISO; 2011.
20.
go back to reference Lüthje C, Herstatt C, von Hippel E. User-innovators and “local” information: the case of mountain biking. Res Policy. 2005;34:951–65.CrossRef Lüthje C, Herstatt C, von Hippel E. User-innovators and “local” information: the case of mountain biking. Res Policy. 2005;34:951–65.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Fox S. Peer-to-peer healthcare. Washington D.C.: Pew Research Center; 2011. Fox S. Peer-to-peer healthcare. Washington D.C.: Pew Research Center; 2011.
22.
go back to reference White W, Calhoun C, Holovach J, Marie J, Buchanan L, Sames L et al. Uncommon Challenges; Shared Journeys. Siren Press; 2011. White W, Calhoun C, Holovach J, Marie J, Buchanan L, Sames L et al. Uncommon Challenges; Shared Journeys. Siren Press; 2011.
23.
go back to reference von Hippel E, DeMonaco HJ, de Jong JPJ. Market failure in the diffusion of user innovations: the case of “Off-Label” innovations by medical clinicians. SSRN Electron J 2014:1–33. von Hippel E, DeMonaco HJ, de Jong JPJ. Market failure in the diffusion of user innovations: the case of “Off-Label” innovations by medical clinicians. SSRN Electron J 2014:1–33.
24.
go back to reference Treasure T, Pepper J, Golesworthy T, Mohiaddin R, Anderson RH. External aortic root support: NICE guidance. Heart. 2012;98:65–8.CrossRefPubMed Treasure T, Pepper J, Golesworthy T, Mohiaddin R, Anderson RH. External aortic root support: NICE guidance. Heart. 2012;98:65–8.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Treasure T, Pepper J. Personalised External Aortic Root Support (PEARS) compared with alternatives for people with life-threatening genetically determined aneurysms of the aortic root. Diseases. 2015;3:2–14.CrossRef Treasure T, Pepper J. Personalised External Aortic Root Support (PEARS) compared with alternatives for people with life-threatening genetically determined aneurysms of the aortic root. Diseases. 2015;3:2–14.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Franke N, Schreier M, Kaiser U. The “I Designed It Myself” effect in mass customization. Manage Sci. 2010;56:125–40.CrossRef Franke N, Schreier M, Kaiser U. The “I Designed It Myself” effect in mass customization. Manage Sci. 2010;56:125–40.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Innovation by patients with rare diseases and chronic needs
Authors
Pedro Oliveira
Leid Zejnilovic
Helena Canhão
Eric von Hippel
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1750-1172
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-015-0257-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 1/2015 Go to the issue