• Samantha MacLean, Sohail Mulla, Elie A Akl, Milosz Jankowski, Per Olav Vandvik, Shanil Ebrahim, Shelley McLeod, Neera Bhatnagar, and Gordon H Guyatt.
• Department of Biostatistics and Clinical Epidemiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. Electronic address: macleast@mcmaster.ca.
• Chest. 2012 Feb 1; 141 (2 Suppl): e1Se23Se1S-e23S.

BackgroundDevelopment of clinical practice guidelines involves making trade-offs between desirable and undesirable consequences of alternative management strategies. Although the relative value of health states to patients should provide the basis for these trade-offs, few guidelines have systematically summarized the relevant evidence. We conducted a systematic review relating to values and preferences of patients considering antithrombotic therapy.MethodsWe included studies examining patient preferences for alternative approaches to antithrombotic prophylaxis and studies that examined, in the context of antithrombotic prophylaxis or treatment, how patients value alternative health states and experiences with treatment. We conducted a systematic search and compiled structured summaries of the results. Steps in the process that involved judgment were conducted in duplicate.ResultsWe identified 48 eligible studies. Sixteen dealt with atrial fibrillation, five with VTE, four with stroke or myocardial infarction prophylaxis, six with thrombolysis in acute stroke or myocardial infarction, and 17 with burden of antithrombotic treatment.ConclusionPatient values and preferences regarding thromboprophylaxis treatment appear to be highly variable. Participant responses may depend on their prior experience with the treatments or health outcomes considered as well as on the methods used for preference elicitation. It should be standard for clinical practice guidelines to conduct systematic reviews of patient values and preferences in the specific content area.

32 keywords...

hide…