Fertility and sterility · 1998
Systemic methotrexate therapy versus laparoscopic salpingostomy in tubal pregnancy. Part II. Patient preferences for systemic methotrexate.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nieuwkerk P T, Hajenius P J, Van der Veen F, Ankum W M, Wijker W, Bossuyt P M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate patient preferences for systemic methotrexate therapy relative to laparoscopic salpingostomy in the treatment of tubal pregnancy.
DESIGN: Preference assessment in controlled clinical study.
SETTING: Four hospitals and one infertility clinic.
PATIENT(S): Forty patients who had been treated for tubal pregnancy and 40 nonpregnant controls.
INTERVENTION(S): Preference for methotrexate therapy relative to salpingostomy was established during an interview. Two scenarios were offered for methotrexate therapy: one with and one without preceding diagnostic laparoscopy. Hypothetical tubal patency rates after methotrexate therapy were varied in both scenarios until patients switched in their initial preference.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Preference for systemic methotrexate therapy.
RESULT(S): Only a few patients switched in their initial preference when the tubal patency rate after systemic methotrexate therapy was varied. Most preferred methotrexate therapy without an increase in the tubal patency rate in a scenario without preceding diagnostic laparoscopy. A small group never opted for methotrexate therapy even when it would guarantee a 100% tubal patency rate.
CONCLUSION(S): Systemic methotrexate therapy would be preferred by most patients as part of a completely nonsurgical management strategy. Tubal patency was a decisive factor for treatment preference in a minority of patients only.
DESIGN: Preference assessment in controlled clinical study.
SETTING: Four hospitals and one infertility clinic.
PATIENT(S): Forty patients who had been treated for tubal pregnancy and 40 nonpregnant controls.
INTERVENTION(S): Preference for methotrexate therapy relative to salpingostomy was established during an interview. Two scenarios were offered for methotrexate therapy: one with and one without preceding diagnostic laparoscopy. Hypothetical tubal patency rates after methotrexate therapy were varied in both scenarios until patients switched in their initial preference.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Preference for systemic methotrexate therapy.
RESULT(S): Only a few patients switched in their initial preference when the tubal patency rate after systemic methotrexate therapy was varied. Most preferred methotrexate therapy without an increase in the tubal patency rate in a scenario without preceding diagnostic laparoscopy. A small group never opted for methotrexate therapy even when it would guarantee a 100% tubal patency rate.
CONCLUSION(S): Systemic methotrexate therapy would be preferred by most patients as part of a completely nonsurgical management strategy. Tubal patency was a decisive factor for treatment preference in a minority of patients only.