ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024
Patient perceptions and preferences of minimally invasive treatment modalities in varicose veins: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond the Evidence: Psychological and Institutional Factors Shaping Patent Ductus Arteriosus Stent Adoption.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Review
- Polidocanol in Sclerotherapy for Lymphovenous Disorders: Mechanisms, Clinical Uses, and Future Prospects.Drugs · 2026Review
- Global trends and collaborative networks in minimally invasive treatments for great saphenous varicose veins: a bibliometric analysis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Minimally invasive therapies (MIT) have gained popularity due to their capacity to reduce trauma, enhance aesthetic outcomes, and shorten recovery periods. This article explores patients' perceptions and preferences regarding MIT for varicose veins (VVs) while analyzing associated influencing factors to provide a better understanding. Patients and methods: A cross-sectional survey at Zhejiang Rongjun Hospital was performed from January 2022 to June 2023, involving 305 participants with VVs. The questionnaire assessed patient demographics, VVs severity, prior treatment experiences, and treatment preferences. Statistical analyses, including chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests, were conducted to explore the correlations between patient characteristics, treatment preferences, and factors influencing these choices. Results: Nearly half of the participants (44.3%) lacked information on any surgical options, whereas a slight majority (55.7%) possessed familiarity with at least one treatment modality, and only 9.8% knew of all six treatment methods presented. Patient surveys discerned that the majority (68.5%) declared an inadequate grasp of treatment methodologies to articulate a treatment preference. Among the 96 patients who made a treatment choice, 24.0% opted for traditional surgery, while 76.0% chose MIT and a higher preference for MIT among male patients compared to female patients ( Conclusion: The study highlights limited awareness of MIT among Chinese patients with VVs. The insights emphasize the influential role of vascular surgeons' recommendations and suggest a growing predilection for less invasive treatments due to their advantages in recovery and aesthetics. Provider-patient communication, including education about available treatments and shared decision-making, is essential to align treatment plans with patient expectations and improve outcomes.
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.