Nease R F, Kneeland T, O'Connor G T, Sumner W, Lumpkins C, Shaw L, Pryor D, Sox H C
Department of Community and Family Medicine, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH, USA.
JAMA. 1995 Apr 19;273(15):1185-90.
Although practice guidelines sometimes make recommendations based on symptom severity, they rarely account for how patients feel about their symptoms. To investigate the possible importance of patient preferences in treatment of ischemic heart disease, we assessed attitudes toward symptoms in patients with angina pectoris.
Case series.
Ambulatory cardiology clinics at two tertiary care medical centers.
A total of 220 subjects were selected from 589 patients with chronic stable angina referred from cardiologists to achieve patients samples balanced for sex, race, and angina severity.
We measured patients' attitudes toward their angina using the rating scale, time trade-off, and standard gamble utility metrics. Reliability of measurements was evaluated by repeating the assessments 2 weeks later on 50 willing patients.
While the mean responses followed the expected patterns (those with more severe Canadian Cardiovascular Society scores chose lower utilities), attitudes toward symptoms varied substantially among patients with similarly severe angina. For example, there was a 33% chance that a patient with class II angina had a time trade-off utility that was lower (ie, more bothered by symptoms) than a patient with more severe angina (class III/IV). This variation in utilities was not due to random error in the assessments.
Angina patients with similar functional limitation vary considerably in their tolerance for their symptoms, as measured by utilities. Our findings suggest that guidelines for the management of ischemic heart disease should be based on the preferences of the individual patient rather than on symptom severity alone.
尽管实践指南有时会根据症状严重程度提出建议,但它们很少考虑患者对自身症状的感受。为了调查患者偏好在缺血性心脏病治疗中的潜在重要性,我们评估了心绞痛患者对症状的态度。
病例系列。
两家三级医疗中心的门诊心脏病诊所。
从心脏病专家转诊的589例慢性稳定型心绞痛患者中选取了220名受试者,以获得在性别、种族和心绞痛严重程度方面均衡的患者样本。
我们使用评分量表、时间权衡法和标准博弈效用指标来测量患者对心绞痛的态度。通过在2周后对50名愿意参与的患者重复评估来评估测量的可靠性。
虽然平均反应符合预期模式(加拿大心血管学会评分较高的患者选择较低的效用值),但在心绞痛严重程度相似的患者中,对症状的态度差异很大。例如,一名II级心绞痛患者的时间权衡效用值低于(即,受症状困扰更大)一名心绞痛更严重(III/IV级)患者的可能性为33%。这种效用值的差异并非由于评估中的随机误差。
通过效用值测量,功能受限程度相似的心绞痛患者对症状的耐受性差异很大。我们的研究结果表明,缺血性心脏病管理指南应基于个体患者的偏好,而不仅仅是症状严重程度。