Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
This study evaluated the utility and quality-of-life year measurements for patients with coronary artery disease who underwent any of 3 therapeutic strategies with a 5-year follow-up.Methods
Quality-of-life data were obtained from the Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study II trial. To obtain utilities, the 36-Item Short-Form questionnaire was converted to a 6-Dimensional Health State Classification System.Results
Of the 611 initial patients, 579 completed the questionnaire. In all, 188 patients received the surgical treatment-194 the percutaneous, and the remaining 197 the medical. The median utility scores for the 5 years analyzed were 0.809 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.794-0.842) for patients assigned to percutaneous coronary intervention, 0.755 (95% CI 0.723-0.774) for medical treatment, and 0.780 (95% CI 0.761-0.809) for coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The difference between percutaneous coronary intervention and medical treatment was statistically significant (P?ConclusionCoronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention were similar regarding cumulative quality-of-life years; however, they were both superior to that of medical treatment. The results presented are valuable data for further cost-utility studies.
SUBMITTER: Brandao SMG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5815720 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Medicine 20171201 50
<h4>Objectives</h4>This study evaluated the utility and quality-of-life year measurements for patients with coronary artery disease who underwent any of 3 therapeutic strategies with a 5-year follow-up.<h4>Methods</h4>Quality-of-life data were obtained from the Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study II trial. To obtain utilities, the 36-Item Short-Form questionnaire was converted to a 6-Dimensional Health State Classification System.<h4>Results</h4>Of the 611 initial patients, 579 completed the ...[more]