Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Patient. 2019 Apr;12(2):235-246. doi: 10.1007/s40271-018-0329-1.
Preference weights derived from general population samples are often used for therapeutic decision making. In contrast, patients with cardiovascular disease may have different preferences concerning the benefits and risks of anticoagulant therapy. Using a discrete choice experiment, we compared preferences for anticoagulant treatment outcomes between the general population and patients with cardiovascular disease.
A sample of the general US population and a sample of patients with cardiovascular disease were selected from online panels. We used a discrete choice experiment questionnaire to elicit preferences in both populations concerning treatment benefits and risks. Seven attributes described hypothetical treatments: non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, cardiovascular death, minor bleeding, major bleeding, fatal bleeding, and the need for monitoring. We measured preference weights and maximum acceptable risks in both populations.
A total of 352 individuals from the general population and 341 patients completed the questionnaire. After propensity score matching, 284 from each group were included in the analysis. On average, the general population members valued a 1% increased risk of fatal bleeding as being the same as a 4.2% increase in a non-fatal myocardial infarction, a 2.8% increase in cardiovascular death, or a 14.1% increase in minor bleeding. Patients, in contrast, perceived a 1% increased risk of fatal bleeding as being the same as a 2.0% increase in a non-fatal myocardial infarction, a 3.2% increase in cardiovascular death, and a 16.7% increase in minor bleeding.
The general population and patients with cardiovascular disease had slightly different preferences for treatment outcomes. The differences can potentially influence estimated benefits and risks and patient-centered treatment decisions.
从一般人群样本中得出的偏好权重通常用于治疗决策。相比之下,心血管疾病患者可能对抗凝治疗的益处和风险有不同的偏好。我们使用离散选择实验比较了一般人群和心血管疾病患者对抗凝治疗结果的偏好。
从在线小组中选择了一般美国人群样本和心血管疾病患者样本。我们使用离散选择实验问卷在两个群体中引出关于治疗益处和风险的偏好。七个属性描述了假设的治疗方法:非致死性中风、非致死性心肌梗死、心血管死亡、轻微出血、大出血、致命出血和监测需求。我们测量了两个群体的偏好权重和最大可接受风险。
共有 352 名一般人群成员和 341 名患者完成了问卷。经过倾向评分匹配后,每组有 284 人被纳入分析。平均而言,一般人群成员认为致命出血风险增加 1%与非致死性心肌梗死增加 4.2%、心血管死亡增加 2.8%或轻微出血增加 14.1%的效果相同。相比之下,患者认为致命出血风险增加 1%与非致死性心肌梗死增加 2.0%、心血管死亡增加 3.2%和轻微出血增加 16.7%的效果相同。
一般人群和心血管疾病患者对治疗结果的偏好略有不同。这些差异可能会影响估计的益处和风险以及以患者为中心的治疗决策。