医学
跛行
血运重建
置信区间
相对风险
逻辑回归
死亡风险
食品药品监督管理局
急诊医学
人口学
外科
内科学
医疗急救
血管疾病
动脉疾病
心肌梗塞
社会学
作者
Shelby D. Reed,Jessie Sutphin,Matthew J. Wallace,Juan Marcos González,Jui‐Chen Yang,F. Reed Johnson,Jennifer Tsapatsaris,Michelle E. Tarver,Anindita Saha,Allen L. Chen,David Gebben,Misti Malone,Andrew Farb,Olufemi Babalola,Eva Rorer,Sahil A. Parikh,Jessica P. Simons,W. Schuyler Jones,Mitchell W. Krucoff,Eric A. Secemsky
标识
DOI:10.1177/1358863x241290233
摘要
BACKGROUND: In 2019, the US Food and Drug Administration issued a warning that symptomatic relief from claudication using paclitaxel-coated devices might be associated with an increase in mortality over 5 years. We designed a discrete-choice experiment (DCE) to quantify tradeoffs that patients would accept between a decreased risk of clinically driven target-vessel revascularization (CDTVR) and increased mortality risk. METHODS: Patients with claudication symptoms were recruited from seven medical centers to complete a web-based survey including eight DCE questions that presented pairs of hypothetical device profiles defined by varying risks of CDTVR and overall mortality at 2 and 5 years. Random-parameters logit models were used to estimate relative preference weights, from which the maximum-acceptable increase in 5-year mortality risk was derived. RESULTS: A total of 272 patients completed the survey. On average, patients would accept a device offering reductions in CDTVR risks from 30% to 10% at 2 years and from 40% to 30% at 5 years if the 5-year mortality risk was less than 12.6% (95% CI: 11.8-13.4%), representing a cut-point of 4.6 percentage points above a baseline risk of 8%. However, approximately 40% chose the device alternative with the lower 5-year mortality risk in seven (20.6%) or eight (18.0%) of the eight DCE questions regardless of the benefit offered. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients in the study would accept some incremental increase in 5-year mortality risk to reduce the 2-year and 5-year risks of CDTVR by 20 and 10 percentage points, respectively. However, significant patient-level variability in risk tolerance underscores the need for systematic approaches to support benefit-risk decision making.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI