Patient preferences for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after injury: a discrete choice experiment
- PMID: 28801426
- PMCID: PMC5629686
- DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016676
Patient preferences for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after injury: a discrete choice experiment
Erratum in
-
Correction: Patient preferences for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after injury: a discrete choice experiment.BMJ Open. 2017 Dec 22;7(12):e016676corr1. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016676corr1. BMJ Open. 2017. PMID: 29275355 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Abstract
Objective: Limited evidence for the optimal venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis regimen in orthopaedic trauma leads to variability in regimens. We sought to delineate patient preferences towards cost, complication profile, and administration route (oral tablet vs. subcutaneous injection).
Design: Discrete choice experiment (DCE).
Setting: Level 1 trauma center in Baltimore, USA.
Participants: 232 adult trauma patients (mean age 47.9 years) with pelvic or acetabular fractures or operative extremity fractures.
Primary and secondary outcome measures: Relative preferences and trade-off estimates for a 1% reduction in complications were estimated using multinomial logit modelling. Interaction terms were added to the model to assess heterogeneity in preferences.
Results: Patients preferred oral tablets over subcutaneous injections (marginal utility, 0.16; 95% CI: 0.11 - 0.21, P<0.0001). Preferences changed in favor of subcutaneous injections with an absolute risk reduction of 6.98% in bleeding, 4.53% in wound complications requiring reoperation, 1.27% in VTE, and 0.07% in death from pulmonary embolism (PE). Patient characteristics (sex, race, type of injury, time since injury) affected patient preferences (P<0.01).
Conclusions: Patients preferred oral prophylaxis and were most concerned about risk of death from PE. Furthermore, the findings estimated the trade-offs acceptable to patients and heterogeneity in preferences for VTE prophylaxis.
Keywords: adult surgery; anticoagulation; thromboembolism; trauma management.
© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.
Conflict of interest statement
Competing interests: CDM reports consulting with Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen/J&J, Mundipharma, NovoNordisk and Pfizer and receiving grants from Bayer, Novartis, Merck and Pfizer. TTM receiving grants from the US Air Force and serves as an advisor for Decisio Health. TTM reports consulting with Stryker, Globus and Smith & Nephew, being paid for expert testimony from various law firms and payment for lectures by the Maine Review Course. RVOT reports consulting with Coorstek (Zimmer) and Smith & Nephew and receiving royalties from Coorstek. GPS reports payments for presenting by Zimmer Biomet. No other disclosures were reported.
Figures
References
-
- Shackford SR, Moser KM. Deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in trauma patients. J Intensive Care Med 1988;3:87–98. 10.1177/088506668800300205 - DOI
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical