Of what importance is knowing how patients assess the quality of life (QOL) of health states when trying to make decisions about health care? Consider the case of routine prophylaxis of hospitalized medical patients to prevent venous thromboembolism. In a recent review sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Lederle et al1 pooled data from more than a dozen randomized trials comparing the use of heparin with no heparin. They found that the best estimate was that use of heparin prophylaxis was associated with 2 fewer cases of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis and 4 fewer cases of pulmonary embolism per 1000 patients, but an increase in 9 cases per 1000 of bleeding events, of which 1 case per 1000 patients was a “major” bleeding event. How is a clinician to balance these benefits and harms? The Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians (on which we have both served) made the assumption that most patients would decide that the benefits from reduction in deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolus would outweigh the harms associated with bleeding complications, and therefore recommended that hospitalized medical patients (without stroke) receive heparin prophylaxis.2 But was this assumption correct? The answer rests in part on how patients view the QOL of health states associated with venous thromboembolism and complications of therapy.
Thank you for submitting a comment on this article. It will be reviewed by JAMA Internal Medicine editors. You will be notified when your comment has been published. Comments should not exceed 500 words of text and 10 references.
Do not submit personal medical questions or information that could identify a specific patient, questions about a particular case, or general inquiries to an author. Only content that has not been published, posted, or submitted elsewhere should be submitted. By submitting this Comment, you and any coauthors transfer copyright to the journal if your Comment is posted.
* = Required Field
Disclosure of Any Conflicts of Interest*
Indicate all relevant conflicts of interest of each author below, including all relevant financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including, but not limited to, employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speakers’ bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued. If all authors have none, check "No potential conflicts or relevant financial interests" in the box below. Please also indicate any funding received in support of this work. The information will be posted with your response.
Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.
Download citation file:
Web of Science® Times Cited: 1
Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.
More Listings atJAMACareerCenter.com >
The Rational Clinical Examination
Table 43-1 Risk Factors for Venous Thromboembolism
The Rational Clinical Examination
Venous thrombosis occurs in 1 to 2 persons per 1000 person-years, with approximately one-half to...
All results at
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a link to reset your password.
Enter your username and email address. We'll send instructions on how to reset your password to the email address we have on record.
Athens and Shibboleth are access management services that provide single sign-on to protected resources. They replace the multiple user names and passwords necessary to access subscription-based content with a single user name and password that can be entered once per session. It operates independently of a user's location or IP address. If your institution uses Athens or Shibboleth authentication, please contact your site administrator to receive your user name and password.