Proximity to Disease and Perception of Utility: Physicians' vs Patients' Assessment of Treatment Options for Ulcerative Colitis
ABSTRACT Physician values regarding the benefit of continued medical therapy vs colectomy for moderate ulcerative colitis have not been defined. If physicians perceive these states differently than patients, their therapeutic recommendations may not align with patient values.
This study aimed to compare physician and patient willingness to trade life years with moderately active ulcerative colitis vs undergoing colectomy.
This survey of physicians' and patients' utility values used standardized scenarios for moderately active ulcerative colitis and colectomy.
The investigation was conducted at a tertiary academic medical center.
Gastroenterologists, colorectal surgeons, and patients with ulcerative colitis who were either living with moderate disease or were postcolectomy completed the survey.
Utility values were measured by the use of the time trade-off method.
We surveyed 17 physicians, 150 postcolectomy patients, and 69 patients with moderate ulcerative colitis. Utility values for ulcerative colitis and colectomy states were (0.87, 0.95), (0.86, 0.92), and (0.91, 0.91). On average, physicians and postcolectomy patients assessed the utility of life with ulcerative colitis more poorly than the postcolectomy state. Patients with moderately active ulcerative colitis who had not undergone colectomy viewed both health states equally.
This study was limited by the physician subject sample size.
Patients living with moderate ulcerative colitis value the pre- and postcolectomy states differently than physicians and postcolectomy patients. Recognizing the differences between their own and patients' values may help physicians to better counsel patients preoperatively. In addition, exposure to postcolectomy patients may help those with moderate disease who are weighing the comparative benefits of colectomy.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background Recent events in healthcare reform have brought national attention to integrating patient experiences and expectations into quality metrics. Few studies have comprehensively evaluated the effect of patient expectations on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following surgery. The purpose of this study is to systematically review the available literature describing the relationship between patient expectations and postoperative PROs. Methods We performed a search of the literature published prior to November 1, 2012. Articles were included in the review if 1) primary data were presented 2) patient expectations regarding a surgical procedure were measured 3) PROs were measured, and 4) the relationship between patient expectations and PROs was specifically examined. PROs were categorized into five subgroups: satisfaction, quality of life (QOL), disability, mood disorder, and pain. We examined each study to determine the relationship between patient expectations and PROs as well as study quality. Results From the initial literature search yielding 1,708 studies, 60 articles were included. Fulfillment of expectations was associated with improved PROs among 24 studies. Positive expectations were correlated with improved PROs for 28 (47%) studies, and poorer PROs for 9 (15%) studies. Eighteen studies reported that fulfillment of expectations was correlated with improved patient satisfaction, and 10 studies identified that positive expectations were correlated with improved postoperative QOL. Finally, patients with positive preoperative expectations reported less pain (8 studies) and disability (15 studies) compared with patients with negative preoperative expectations. Conclusions Patient expectations are inconsistently correlated with PROs following surgery, and there is no accepted method to capture perioperative expectations. Future efforts to rigorously measure expectations and explore their influence on postoperative outcomes can inform clinicians and policy-makers seeking to integrate PROs into measures of surgical quality.Surgery 01/2013; 155(5). DOI:10.1016/j.surg.2013.12.015 · 3.11 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), consisting of both Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), are chronic inflammatory conditions of the intestinal tract. As there is no cure for either CD or UC, patients with these conditions face numerous treatment decisions regarding their disease. The aim of this review is to evaluate literature regarding quantitative studies of patient preferences in therapy for IBD with a focus on the emerging technique of stated preference and its application in IBD. Numerous simple survey-based studies have been performed evaluating IBD patients' preferences for medication frequency, mode of delivery, potential adverse events, etc., as well as variations in these preferences. These studies are limited, however, as they are purely descriptive in nature with limited quantitative information on the relative value of treatment alternatives. Time trade-off and standard-gamble studies have also been utilized to quantify patient utility for various treatment options or outcomes. However, these types of studies suffer from inaccurate assumptions regarding patient choice behavior. Stated preference is an emerging robust methodology increasingly utilized in health care that can determine the relative utility for a therapy option as well as its specific attributes (such as efficacy or adverse side effects). Stated preference techniques have begun to be applied in IBD and offer an innovative way of examining the numerous therapy options these patients and their providers face.The patient 10/2013; 6(4). DOI:10.1007/s40271-013-0031-2 · 1.96 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Therapy options for mesalamine-refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) include immunosuppressive medications or surgery. Chronic immunosuppressive therapy increases risks of infection and cancer, whereas surgery produces a permanent change in bowel function. We sought to quantify the willingness of patients with UC to accept the risks of chronic immunosuppression to avoid colectomy. We conducted a state-of-the-art discrete-choice experiment among 293 patients with UC who were offered a choice of medication or surgical treatments with different features. Random parameters logit was used to estimate patients' willingness to accept trade-offs among treatment features in selecting surgery versus medical treatment. A desire to avoid surgery and the surgery type (ostomy versus J-pouch) influenced patients' choices more than a specified range of 10-year mortality risks from lymphoma or infection, or disease activity (mild versus remission). To avoid an ostomy, patients were willing to accept a >5% 10-year risk of dying from lymphoma or infection from medical therapy, regardless of medication efficacy. However, data on patients' stated choice indicated perceived equivalence between J-pouch surgery and incompletely effective medical therapy. Patient characteristics and disease history influenced patients' preferences regarding surgery versus medical therapy. Patients with UC are willing to accept relatively high risks of fatal complications from medical therapy to avoid a permanent ostomy and to achieve durable clinical remission. However, patients view J-pouch surgery, but not permanent ileostomy, as an acceptable therapy for refractory UC in which medical therapy is unable to induce a durable remission.Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 11/2013; DOI:10.1097/01.MIB.0000437498.14804.50 · 5.48 Impact Factor