ArticleThe patient2015
Positive Outcomes of Varicose Vein Surgery: The Patient Perspective.
Article in The patient, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Different management options for primary varicose veins in females: A prospective study.Surgery open science · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported outcomes are increasingly recognized as important to understanding outcomes of medical interventions such as varicose vein surgery (VVS). Our aim was to compare positive outcomes of VVS as defined by several patient-reported measures, and to identify baseline characteristics associated with positive outcomes of VVS.
methodsA secondary analysis of the UK Patient-Reported Outcome Measures database was conducted on patients undergoing VVS, in the period 2009-2011 who completed the generic EQ-5D (index and visual analog scale [VAS] summary scores) and disease-specific Aberdeen varicose vein questionnaire (AVVQ). Surgical outcome was defined as positive if pre/post change scores exceeded half a standard deviation of mean baseline scores. Logistic regression models were used to identify significant predictors of positive outcomes, including age, gender, and baseline health.
resultsOf 9,113 patients analyzed (71% females, 57% aged >50 years), positive outcomes were identified in 62% using the AVVQ, 43% based on EQ-5D index scores, and 24% according to EQ-VAS; 10% improved on all three measures. Patients with poorer baseline functioning (AVVQ scores ≥ 11) were more likely to have a positive outcome based on the EQ-5D index (odds ratio [OR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.36) and EQ-VAS (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.14-1.47).
conclusionsDefining surgery as successful will clearly depend on how health-related quality of life (HRQL) is operationalized and the criteria used to identify meaningful change. Across a range of criteria, a consistently greater proportion of patients had positive outcomes in terms of VV-related functioning (via AVVQ) compared with those who improved in terms of generic health (via EQ-index), or self-rated health (EQ-VAS).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.