ABSTRACT
In a recent multinational randomized clinical trial, 1356 patients from 14 countries were randomized between two arms. The primary measure of effectiveness was 30-day survival. Health care utilization was collected on all patients and was combined with a single country's price weights to provide patient-level cost data. The purpose of this paper is to report the results of the cost-effectiveness analysis for the country that provided the cost weights, so as to provide a case study for illustrating recently proposed methodologies that account for skewed cost data, the between-country variation in treatment effects, possible interactions between treatment and baseline covariates, and the difficulty of estimated adjusted risk differences. A hierarchal model is used to account for the two sources of variation (between country and between patients, within a country). The model, which uses gamma distributions for cost data and recent methods for estimating adjusted risk differences, provides overall and country-specific estimates of treatment effects. Model estimation is facilitated by Markov chain Monte Carlo methods using the WinBUGS software. In addition, the theory of expected value of information is used to determine if the data provided by the trial are sufficient for decision making.
Subject(s)
Health Services/statistics & numerical data , International Cooperation , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Decision Making , Humans , Models, Econometric , Probability , Reproducibility of Results , Survival AnalysisABSTRACT
Although intensive chemotherapy (IC) may modestly improve survival compared to supportive care in older people with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), treatment may worsen quality of life (QOL) and functional status. We assessed QOL and functional status at baseline, 1 month, 4 months, and 6 months in 65 consecutive, English-speaking, patients age 60 or older with newly diagnosed AML. At baseline, functional status was high but QOL was negatively affected in global health and most QOL domains. Over time, QOL remained stable or improved in most patients and was generally similar between IC and non-IC groups. Basic activities of daily living (ADL) scores did not change over time, whereas instrumental ADL scores declined slightly regardless of treatment. Receiving IC does not appear to lead to worse QOL or functional status than more palliative approaches. This information may aid treatment discussions in older patients with AML.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Health Status , Quality of Life , Activities of Daily Living , Acute Disease , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Karnofsky Performance Status , Leukemia, Myeloid/complications , Leukemia, Myeloid/drug therapy , Leukemia, Myeloid/physiopathology , Male , Time FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Higher crash rates per mile driven in older drivers have focused attention on the assessment of older drivers. OBJECTIVE: To examine the attitudes and practices of family physicians regarding fitness-to-drive issues in older persons. DESIGN: Survey questionnaire. PARTICIPANTS: The questionnaire was sent to 1,000 randomly selected Canadian family physicians. Four hundred sixty eligible physicians returned completed questionnaires. MEASUREMENTS: Self-reported attitudes and practices towards driving assessments and the reporting of medically unsafe drivers. RESULTS: Over 45% of physicians are not confident in assessing driving fitness and do not consider themselves to be the most qualified professionals to do so. The majority (88.6%) feel that they would benefit from further education in this area. About 75% feel that reporting a patient as an unsafe driver places them in a conflict of interest and negatively impacts on the patient and the physician-patient relationship. Nevertheless, most (72.4%) agree that physicians should be legally responsible for reporting unsafe drivers to the licensing authorities. Physicians from provinces with mandatory versus discretionary reporting requirements are more likely to report unsafe drivers (odds ratio [OR], 2.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.58 to 4.91), but less likely to perform driving assessments (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.85). Most driving assessments take between 10 and 30 minutes, with much variability in the components included. CONCLUSIONS: Family physicians lack confidence in performing driving assessments and note many negative consequences of reporting unsafe drivers. Education about assessing driving fitness and approaches that protect the physician-patient relationship when reporting occurs are needed.
