A multicentre randomised controlled trial assessing the costs and benefits of using structured information and analysis of womens preferences in the management of menorrhagia
Kennedy AD, Sculpher MJ, Coulter A, Dwyer N, Rees M, Horsely S, Cowley D, Kidson C, Kirwin C, Naish C, Bidgood K, Cullimore J, Kerr-Wilson R, Abrams KR, Stirrat G
Record ID 32003000419
English
Authors' objectives:
The aim of this review was to develop decision aids to provide evidence-based information and formal preference elicitation for women with menorrhagia; and to evaluate their effects on patient outcomes, patient management and cost-effectiveness.
Authors' results and conclusions:
Health status: The interventions had no consistent effect on health status compared with controls.
Preference formation: In comparison with the control group, women were more likely to hold a treatment preference in both the information and interview groups post-consultation. The interview also influenced preferences towards individual treatments, where women were less likely than controls to want hysterectomy or drug therapy.
Treatments undergone: After 2 years of follow-up, women in the interview group were less likely to have undergone hysterectomy than controls and women who were only given information.
Satisfaction: The results of the satisfaction analyses were mixed. At short-term follow-up, the information group was significantly more satisfied than controls with the opportunities that they had been given to be involved in treatment decision-making. At long-term follow-up the interview group rated both these opportunities and the results of their treatment higher than women in the control group.
Authors' recommendations:
Neither intervention had a major impact on health outcomes relative to control. Information plus interview gave major additional benefits compared with the information pack on its own. It helped women form preferences, reduced hysterectomy rates and increased long-term satisfaction. The interview also had the highest probability of being cost-effective.
Authors' methods:
Randomised controlled trial
Details
Project Status:
Completed
URL for project:
http://www.hta.ac.uk/898
Year Published:
2003
English language abstract:
An English language summary is available
Publication Type:
Not Assigned
Country:
England, United Kingdom
MeSH Terms
- Costs and Cost Analysis
- Decision Making
- Menorrhagia
- Patient Education as Topic
Contact
Organisation Name:
NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme
Contact Address:
NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK
Contact Name:
journals.library@nihr.ac.uk
Contact Email:
journals.library@nihr.ac.uk
Copyright:
2003 Queen's Printer and Controller of HMSO
This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA or other HTA producer. No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database.