Skip to main content
release_alert
Welcome to the new Scholars 3.0! Read about new features and let us know what you think.
cancel

Quantifying Benefit-Risk Preferences for Heart Failure Devices: A Stated-Preference Study.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Reed, SD; Yang, J-C; Rickert, T; Johnson, FR; Gonzalez, JM; Mentz, RJ; Krucoff, MW; Vemulapalli, S; Adamson, PB; Gebben, DJ; Rincon-Gonzalez, L ...
Published in: Circ Heart Fail
January 2022

BACKGROUND: Regulatory and clinical decisions involving health technologies require judgements about relative importance of their expected benefits and risks. We sought to quantify heart-failure patients' acceptance of therapeutic risks in exchange for improved effectiveness with implantable devices. METHODS: Individuals with heart failure recruited from a national web panel or academic medical center completed a web-based discrete-choice experiment survey in which they were randomized to one of 40 blocks of 8 experimentally controlled choice questions comprised of 2 device scenarios and a no-device scenario. Device scenarios offered an additional year of physical functioning equivalent to New York Heart Association class III or a year with improved (ie, class II) symptoms, or both, with 30-day mortality risks ranging from 0% to 15%, in-hospital complication risks ranging from 0% to 40%, and a remote adjustment device feature. Logit-based regression models fit participants' choices as a function of health outcomes, risks and remote adjustment. RESULTS: Latent-class analysis of 613 participants (mean age, 65; 49% female) revealed that two-thirds were best represented by a pro-device, more risk-tolerant class, accepting up to 9% (95% CI, 7%-11%) absolute risk of device-associated mortality for a one-year gain in improved functioning (New York Heart Association class II). Approximately 20% were best represented by a less risk-tolerant class, accepting a maximum device-associated mortality risk of 3% (95% CI, 1%-4%) for the same benefit. The remaining class had strong antidevice preferences, thus maximum-acceptable risk was not calculated. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative evidence on benefit-risk tradeoffs for implantable heart-failure device profiles may facilitate incorporating patients' views during product development, regulatory decision-making, and clinical practice.

Duke Scholars

Altmetric Attention Stats
Dimensions Citation Stats

Published In

Circ Heart Fail

DOI

EISSN

1941-3297

Publication Date

January 2022

Volume

15

Issue

1

Start / End Page

e008797

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • Risk Assessment
  • Risk
  • Patient Preference
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Logistic Models
  • Humans
  • Heart Failure
  • Female
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Reed, S. D., Yang, J.-C., Rickert, T., Johnson, F. R., Gonzalez, J. M., Mentz, R. J., … Bruhn-Ding, D. (2022). Quantifying Benefit-Risk Preferences for Heart Failure Devices: A Stated-Preference Study. Circ Heart Fail, 15(1), e008797. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.121.008797
Reed, Shelby D., Jui-Chen Yang, Timothy Rickert, F Reed Johnson, Juan Marcos Gonzalez, Robert J. Mentz, Mitchell W. Krucoff, et al. “Quantifying Benefit-Risk Preferences for Heart Failure Devices: A Stated-Preference Study.Circ Heart Fail 15, no. 1 (January 2022): e008797. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.121.008797.
Reed SD, Yang J-C, Rickert T, Johnson FR, Gonzalez JM, Mentz RJ, et al. Quantifying Benefit-Risk Preferences for Heart Failure Devices: A Stated-Preference Study. Circ Heart Fail. 2022 Jan;15(1):e008797.
Reed, Shelby D., et al. “Quantifying Benefit-Risk Preferences for Heart Failure Devices: A Stated-Preference Study.Circ Heart Fail, vol. 15, no. 1, Jan. 2022, p. e008797. Pubmed, doi:10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.121.008797.
Reed SD, Yang J-C, Rickert T, Johnson FR, Gonzalez JM, Mentz RJ, Krucoff MW, Vemulapalli S, Adamson PB, Gebben DJ, Rincon-Gonzalez L, Saha A, Schaber D, Stein KM, Tarver ME, Bruhn-Ding D. Quantifying Benefit-Risk Preferences for Heart Failure Devices: A Stated-Preference Study. Circ Heart Fail. 2022 Jan;15(1):e008797.

Published In

Circ Heart Fail

DOI

EISSN

1941-3297

Publication Date

January 2022

Volume

15

Issue

1

Start / End Page

e008797

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • Risk Assessment
  • Risk
  • Patient Preference
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Logistic Models
  • Humans
  • Heart Failure
  • Female