Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Asunto de la revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Clin Epidemiol ; 59(7): 653-64, 2006 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16765267

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To summarize and quantify mean differences between directly elicited patient and population health state evaluations (= preferences) and to identify factors explaining these differences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two meta-analyses of observational studies comparing directly elicited patient and population preferences for two stratified health state classifications: actual/hypothetical and hypothetical/hypothetical health states. RESULTS: Thirty-three articles comparing directly elicited patient and population preferences were included, yielding 78 independent preference estimates. These preference estimates served as input for the two stratified health state classifications. Data on health state assessments, elicitation methods, assessment method, and population characteristics was extracted by one reviewer, and checked by two other reviewers. These parameters were used to explain sources of heterogeneity. Overall, patients' actual health state preferences were not significantly higher than populations hypothetical health state preferences (summary mean difference [SMD] = -0.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.01, 0.03). Nor did preferences for hypothetical health states differ between patients and population (SMD -0.00, 95% CI = -0.02, 0.02). Most parameters substantially influenced the SMD, although the magnitude and direction differed for the two strata used (all P-values <.05). CONCLUSIONS: The actual/hypothetical and hypothetical/hypothetical meta-analyses demonstrated no significant differences between patient and population preferences, suggesting that both can be used to allocate scarce resources.


Asunto(s)
Comportamiento del Consumidor , Estado de Salud , Satisfacción del Paciente , Humanos , Asignación de Recursos , Estadísticas no Paramétricas
2.
Ophthalmology ; 111(10): 1832-9, 2004 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15465543

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Although monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) are effective in improving vision after cataract surgery, the loss of accommodation is not restored by implantation of these IOLs. Because multifocal IOLs may improve uncorrected distance and near vision, we compared the clinical outcome and patient satisfaction after implantation of monofocal and multifocal IOLs. Sociodemographics, eagerness for spectacle independence (ESI), and neuroticism were tested as predictors of satisfaction. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Cataract patients with no ocular comorbidity were operated from August 1999 to January 2001; 75 patients were implanted with monofocal IOLs, and 78 with multifocal IOLs. METHODS: Assessments were made preoperatively (t1), 3 months after first-eye surgery (t2), and 3 months after second-eye surgery (t3). Primary outcomes were obtained by ophthalmic tests, whereas secondary outcomes were examined by interviews. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes consisted of near and distance visual acuity (VA). Secondary outcomes related to spectacle dependence, vision-related functioning, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: At t3, multifocal IOLs showed significantly better uncorrected near VA than monofocal IOLs (P<0.01) and an increase in quality ratings of unaided near vision between t1 and t3 (on a scale of 1-5: 1.6 at t1 vs. 2.9 at t3, P<0.001). At t2 and t3, patients with multifocal IOLs were more likely to "never" or "only now and then" wear spectacles for near and distance than patients with monofocal IOLs (at t3, 42.7% multifocal vs. 21.6% monofocal for near [P = 0.002] and 75.0% multifocal vs. 46.2% monofocal for distance [P = 0.001]). On a 0- to 15-point scale, monofocal IOL patients showed fewer complaints from cataract symptoms, including halos and distorted vision, at t3 (1.2 monofocal vs. 2.1 multifocal [P = 0.002]). Satisfaction related to preoperative expectations was similar in the monofocal and multifocal groups. The perceived quality of corrected near vision had the strongest relationship with patient satisfaction (beta = 0.22; 95% confidence interval: 0.060-0.523). Sociodemographics, ESI, and neuroticism did not predict patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, patient satisfaction did not differ between the groups of monofocal and multifocal IOLs. Independent of ESI or neuroticism scores, success of both IOLs depends on preoperative expectations and postoperative quality of aided near vision. This article contains additional online-only material available at .


Asunto(s)
Implantación de Lentes Intraoculares , Lentes Intraoculares , Facoemulsificación , Presbiopía/cirugía , Acomodación Ocular , Anciano , Anteojos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Satisfacción del Paciente , Diseño de Prótesis , Resultado del Tratamiento , Agudeza Visual
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA