ArticleOtolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery2025
Patient Perspectives of Quality Compared to Quantity of Life Regarding Orbital Exenteration.
Article in Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOrbital exenteration (OE) impacts patients cosmetically, functionally, and psychosocially. Eye-sparing strategies with the advent of immunotherapy have developed the potential to avoid OE but may result in suboptimal oncologic outcomes and reduced survival. This study assesses patients' perceptions regarding quantity versus quality of life when considering OE compared to alternative treatment modalities. STUDY
designMixed-methods study, utilizing quantitative health utility tasks and qualitative patient interviews.
settingTertiary care center.
methodsFifty-one patients previously treated for head or neck cutaneous malignancies completed interviews utilizing well-established methodology to assess health state utility values (HSUVs) through time trade-off and standard gamble tasks. This methodology assessed the level of risk patients would be willing to accept to avoid OE in the context of alternate treatment options. Open-ended discussions regarding factors influencing decision-making facilitated an inductive qualitative analysis highlighting patient priorities.
resultsPatients were willing to accept 40.6% ± 28.7% risk of death or give up 3.2 ± 2.8 years of survival to avoid OE. This translated to an HSUV for OE of 0.68. The main factors influencing treatment decisions were (1) family, (2) healthcare perceptions, (3) age, (4) social consequences, and (5) risk tolerance.
conclusionThe consequences of OE on patients' quality of life impact their decision-making. Patients may be willing to accept relatively high levels of risk to avoid OE. This highlights the importance of eye-sparing strategies and shared decision-making to ensure patient-centered care, which may not be solely prioritized to survival when it comes to OE.
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.