IMPORTANCE: Future funding for new treatments in venous thromboembolism will be guided by cost-utility analyses. There is little available information on the utility of acute venous thromboembolism, limiting the validity of economic analyses. OBJECTIVE: To measure the quality of life in the health states relating to thromboembolism cost-utility analyses. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING: A single-center, university-affiliated thrombosis clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred sixteen thrombosis clinic patients with a history of lower limb deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE). EXPOSURES: Participants consented to take a standard gamble interview. Each participant rated the quality of life in acute DVT, acute PE, and bleeding complication health states. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The standard gamble measured quality of life (utility value) for acute DVT, acute PE, major intracranial bleeding event, minor intracranial bleeding event, and gastrointestinal bleeding event. RESULTS: Two hundred fifteen responses were included in the analysis. Twenty-six percent had experienced both PE and DVT; 54%, DVT alone; and 20%, PE alone. Forty-two percent had experienced more than 1 episode of thrombosis, and 23% had had cancer-associated thrombosis. We found the median utility for acute DVT was 0.81 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.55-0.94); acute PE, 0.75 (IQR, 0.45-0.91); major intracranial bleeding event, 0.15 (IQR, 0.00-0.65); minor intracranial bleeding event, 0.75 (IQR, 0.55-0.92); and gastrointestinal bleeding event, 0.65 (IQR, 0.15-0.86). The median length of symptoms for DVT or PE was 1 week (IQR, <1-3 weeks). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: To our knowledge, this is the largest published study on utilities in which the participants had personal experience of venous thromboembolism. We present unique information for economic analyses but have also identified future challenges for research in this area. Our summary results differ from those previously published, and we found wide variation in individual responses.
IMPORTANCE: Future funding for new treatments in venous thromboembolism will be guided by cost-utility analyses. There is little available information on the utility of acute venous thromboembolism, limiting the validity of economic analyses. OBJECTIVE: To measure the quality of life in the health states relating to thromboembolism cost-utility analyses. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING: A single-center, university-affiliated thrombosis clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred sixteen thrombosis clinic patients with a history of lower limb deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE). EXPOSURES: Participants consented to take a standard gamble interview. Each participant rated the quality of life in acute DVT, acute PE, and bleeding complication health states. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The standard gamble measured quality of life (utility value) for acute DVT, acute PE, major intracranial bleeding event, minor intracranial bleeding event, and gastrointestinal bleeding event. RESULTS: Two hundred fifteen responses were included in the analysis. Twenty-six percent had experienced both PE and DVT; 54%, DVT alone; and 20%, PE alone. Forty-two percent had experienced more than 1 episode of thrombosis, and 23% had had cancer-associated thrombosis. We found the median utility for acute DVT was 0.81 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.55-0.94); acute PE, 0.75 (IQR, 0.45-0.91); major intracranial bleeding event, 0.15 (IQR, 0.00-0.65); minor intracranial bleeding event, 0.75 (IQR, 0.55-0.92); and gastrointestinal bleeding event, 0.65 (IQR, 0.15-0.86). The median length of symptoms for DVT or PE was 1 week (IQR, <1-3 weeks). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: To our knowledge, this is the largest published study on utilities in which the participants had personal experience of venous thromboembolism. We present unique information for economic analyses but have also identified future challenges for research in this area. Our summary results differ from those previously published, and we found wide variation in individual responses.
Authors: K A Hagan; L B Harrington; J Kim; O Zeleznik; E B Rimm; F Grodstein; C Kabrhel Journal: J Thromb Haemost Date: 2018-06-08 Impact factor: 5.824
Authors: Abdullah Pandor; Daniel Horner; Sarah Davis; Steve Goodacre; John W Stevens; Mark Clowes; Beverley J Hunt; Tim Nokes; Jonathan Keenan; Kerstin de Wit Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Lauren K Stewart; Geoffrey W Peitz; Kristen E Nordenholz; D Mark Courtney; Christopher Kabrhel; Alan E Jones; Matthew T Rondina; Deborah B Diercks; James R Klinger; Jeffrey A Kline Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 2.300