Multiple criteria decision analysis approach to consider therapeutic innovations in the emergency department: The methoxyflurane organizational impact in acute trauma pain.

Acute trauma pain is poorly managed in the emergency department (ED). The reasons are partly organizational: ED crowding and rare trauma care pathways contribute to oligoanalgesia. Anticipating the organizational impact of an innovative care procedure might facilitate the decision-making process and help to optimize pain management. We used a multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach to consider the organizational impact of methoxyflurane (self-administered) in the ED, introduced alone or supported by a trauma care pathway. A MCDA experiment was designed for this specific context, 8 experts in emergency trauma care pathways (leading physicians and pharmacists working in French urban tertiary hospitals) were recruited. The study involved four steps: (i) Selection of organizational criteria for evaluating the innovation's impact; (ii) assessment of the relative weight of each criterion; (iii) choice of appropriate scenarios for exploring the organizational impact of MEOX under various contexts; and (iv) software-assisted simulation based on pairwise comparisons of the scenarios. The final outcome measure was the expected overall organizational impact of methoxyflurane on a 0-to-100 scale (score >50: positive impact). Nine organizational criteria were selected. "Mean length of stay in the ED" was the most weighted. Methoxyflurane alone obtained 59 as a total score, with a putative positive impact for eight criteria, and a neutral effect on one. When a trauma care pathway was introduced concomitantly, the impact of methoxyflurane was greater overall (score: 75) and for each individual criterion. Our model highlighted the putative positive organizational impact of methoxyflurane in the ED-particularly when supported by a trauma care pathway-and the relevance of expert consensus in this particular pharmacoeconomic context. The MCDA approach could be extended to other research fields and healthcare challenges in emergency medicine.

I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: VEL has individually received occasional travel grants from Mundipharma for participation in national and international congresses, and for advice on pain management communications. MM received fees for board and conference from Mundipharma and Purdue. MM also received a grant to conduct a trial on pain management in the ED (NCT03380247). KT received fees for board and conference from Mundipharma. MLD received fees from Mundipharma. FL received fees from Mundipharma, Novartis, Serb, Teleflex. CD, NPK, CHB declared no potential competing interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. These competing interests do not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. This work was funded by Mundipharma SAS (Paris, France; www.mundipharma.fr). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.