Suppr超能文献

中风以及使用阿司匹林或华法林进行中风预防对生活质量的影响。

The effect of stroke and stroke prophylaxis with aspirin or warfarin on quality of life.

作者信息

Gage B F, Cardinalli A B, Owens D K

机构信息

Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University, St Louis, Mo, USA.

出版信息

Arch Intern Med. 1996 Sep 9;156(16):1829-36.

PMID:8790077
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Because most strokes cause neurological impairment rather than death, stroke prophylaxis may improve quality of life more than length of life. Thus, an understanding of how stroke and stroke prophylaxis affect quality of life is central to clinical decision making for many patients.

METHODS

We elicited quality-of-life estimates, known as utilities, for 3 degrees of severity of anticipated stroke-mild, moderate, and major- and for stroke prophylaxis with either warfarin sodium or aspirin therapy. We used the time tradeoff and standard gamble methods to elicit these utilities from 83 patients who had atrial fibrillation.

RESULTS

Seventy patients completed the interview successfully. Their utilities for stroke ranged from worse than death (< 0) to as good as current health (1.0). The median utilities for mild, moderate, and major stroke were 0.94, 0.07, and 0.0, respectively. Although the median utilities decreased with increasing severity of stroke (P < .001), there was high interpatient variability within each degree of stroke severity. For example, 7 subjects (10%) rated a major stroke above 0.5, while 58 subjects (83%) rated it as equal to or worse than death. In contrast to the stroke utilities, the median utilities for warfarin and aspirin therapy were high-0.997 and 1.0, respectively. However, the interpatient variability for warfarin therapy was also important: 11 patients (16%) with atrial fibrillation rated the utility of warfarin therapy so low that their quality-adjusted life expectancy would be greater with aspirin.

CONCLUSION

Patients' utilities for stroke prophylaxis and anticipated stroke vary substantially. Many patients view the quality of life with major stroke as tantamount to or worse than death. These findings highlight the relevance of incorporating patient preferences when choosing stroke prophylaxis.

摘要

背景

由于大多数中风导致神经功能缺损而非死亡,预防中风对生活质量的改善可能超过对寿命的延长。因此,了解中风及中风预防如何影响生活质量是许多患者临床决策的核心。

方法

我们针对预期中风的3种严重程度——轻度、中度和重度——以及华法林钠或阿司匹林治疗的中风预防措施,得出了生活质量评估值,即效用值。我们采用时间权衡法和标准博弈法,从83名房颤患者中获取这些效用值。

结果

70名患者成功完成访谈。他们对中风的效用值范围从比死亡更糟(<0)到与当前健康状况一样好(1.0)。轻度、中度和重度中风的效用值中位数分别为0.94、0.07和0.0。尽管中风效用值中位数随中风严重程度增加而降低(P<.001),但在每个中风严重程度级别内,患者间存在很大差异。例如,7名受试者(10%)将重度中风的效用值评定为高于0.5,而58名受试者(83%)将其评定为等于或比死亡更糟。与中风效用值不同,华法林和阿司匹林治疗的效用值中位数较高,分别为0.997和1.0。然而,华法林治疗的患者间差异也很显著:11名房颤患者(16%)对华法林治疗的效用值评定很低,以至于使用阿司匹林时他们的质量调整预期寿命会更长。

结论

患者对中风预防和预期中风的效用值差异很大。许多患者认为重度中风后的生活质量等同于或差于死亡。这些发现凸显了在选择中风预防措施时纳入患者偏好的重要性。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验