Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 53, Issue 9 , Pages 888-894, September 2000

Do potential patients prefer tissue plasminogen activator (TPA) over streptokinase (SK)?☆☆

An evaluation of the risks and benefits of TPA from the patient's perspective

  • Daren K Heyland

      Affiliations

    • Department of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Angada 3, Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 2V7. Tel: 613-549-6666x3339; fax: 613-548-2577.
  • ,
  • Amiram Gafni

      Affiliations

    • Center for Health Economics and Policy Analysis and Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • ,
  • Mitchell A.H Levine

      Affiliations

    • Center for Evaluation of Medicines, St. Joseph's Hospital, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Received 27 August 1998; received in revised form 16 July 1999; accepted 28 October 1999.

Abstract 

Background: In patients with acute myocardial infarction, TPA (compared to SK), has been shown to reduce the 30-day mortality rate at the expense of an increased rate of stroke. The assumption in the literature is that were it not for cost issues, all patients presenting with a myocardial infarction would choose TPA. Our hypothesis is that, for many informed individuals, regardless of cost, the increased risk of stroke may deter them from selecting TPA over SK. Objective: To assess which thrombolytic drug informed patients would prefer and to explore the clinical and economic implications of such preferences. Design: Prospective survey. Setting: Tertiary care hospital. Patients: 120 hospitalized patients with cardiac disease who would be “at risk” for a myocardial infarction. Interventions: Face-to-face interviews utilizing a decision instrument. Measurements: To minimize bias in soliciting patients' preferences and to standardize the presentation of information we developed a decision instrument which portrays a case scenario of a myocardial infarction, describes treatment outcomes (survival and stroke rate), and displays the likelihood of these outcomes with SK and TPA using three scenarios: a base stroke risk (all patients data), a lower stroke risk (<75 years old data), a higher stroke risk (>75 years old data). Outcome data were derived from the published literature (GUSTO study). Results: When presented the overall results of the GUSTO study, 60/120 (50%) expressed a preference for SK. When presented the outcome data for the subgroups of patients <75 years old (lower stroke rate), 37/120 (31%) preferred SK. When presented the subgroup data for patients >75 years old (higher stroke risk), 67/120 (56%) preferred SK. Conclusions: Regardless of the scenario that individuals were presented with, a substantial proportion of individuals (31–56%) who could potentially require thrombolytic therapy chose SK over TPA. This study should be repeated in other settings to establish the generalizability of our results. Assuming that these results will be consistent, considering the patient's perspective has significant implications on clinical decision making as well as from an economic perspective.

Keywords:  Thrombolytic therapy, Myocardial infarction, Economic evaluations, Outcomes assessments, Patient preferences, Decision making

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Dr. Heyland is a Career Scientist with the Ministry of Health of Ontario. This Study not funded.

☆☆ Evaluation Study as of July 3, 1999.

PII: S0895-4356(99)00214-0

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 53, Issue 9 , Pages 888-894, September 2000