Journal of Stroke & Cerebrovascular Diseases
Volume 18, Issue 1 , Pages 17-22 , January 2009

Thrombolytic Treatment for Stroke: Patient Preferences for Treatment, Information, and Involvement

  • Karsten Bruins Slot, MD

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence to Karsten Bruins Slot, MD, Department of Internal Medicine, Ullevaal University Hospital, NO-0407 Oslo, Norway.
    • ,
  • Eivind Berge, MD, PhD

Received 14 April 2008 ,Revised 21 May 2008 ,Accepted 9 June 2008.

References 

  1. Wardlaw JM, del Zoppo G, Yamaguchi T, et al. Thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;(3):CD000213
  2. Wahlgren N, Ahmed N, Dávalos A, et al. Thrombolysis with alteplase for acute ischemic stroke in the safe implementation of thrombolysis in stroke-monitoring study (SITS-MOST): An observational study. Lancet. 2007;369(9558):275–282
  3. Adams HP, del Zoppo G, Alberts MJ, et al. Guidelines for the early management of adults with ischemic stroke: A guideline from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association stroke council, clinical cardiology council, cardiovascular radiology and intervention council, and the atherosclerotic peripheral vascular disease and quality of care outcomes in research interdisciplinary working groups. Stroke. 2007;38(5):1655–1711
  4. Van Swieten JC, Koudstaal PJ, Visser MC, et al. Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke. 1988;19(5):604–607
  5. Sheikh J, Yesavage J. Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS): Recent findings and development of a shorter version. In:  Brink TL editors. Clinical gerontology: A guide to assessment and intervention. New York: Haworth Press; 1986;
  6. Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. J Health Econ. 1986;5(1):1–30
  7. Degner LF, Sloan JA. Decision making during serious illness: What role do patients really want to play?. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45(9):941–950
  8. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960;20:37–46
  9. Hallan S, Asberg A, Indredavik B, et al. Quality of life after cerebrovascular stroke: A systematic study of patients' preferences for different functional outcomes. J Intern Med. 1999;246(3):309–316
  10. Lenert LA, Soetikno RM. Automated computer interviews to elicit utilities: Potential applications in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1997;4(1):49–56
  11. Murphy R, Sackley CM, Miller P, et al. Effect of experience of severe stroke on subjective valuations of quality of life after stroke. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2001;70(5):679–681
  12. O'Meara JJ, McNutt RA, Evans AT, et al. A decision analysis of streptokinase plus heparin as compared with heparin alone for deep-vein thrombosis. N Engl J Med. 1994;330(26):1864–1869
  13. Shin AY, Porter PJ, Wallace CM, et al. Quality of life of stroke in younger individuals: Utility assessment in patients with arteriovenous malformations. Stroke. 1997;28(12):2395–2399
  14. Thomson R, Parkin D, Eccles M, et al. Decision analysis and guidelines for anticoagulant therapy to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Lancet. 2000;355(9208):956–962
  15. Davis M, Steward D. Patient utilities and the decision for or against thrombolysis in acute stroke. Acad Emerg Med. 1999;6(5):432-a;(abstr)
  16. Post PN, Stiggelbout AM, Wakker PP. The utility of health states after stroke: A systematic review of the literature. Stroke. 2001;32(6):1425–1429
  17. Llewellyn-Thomas HA, Sutherland HJ, Thiel EC. Do patients' evaluations of a future health state change when they actually enter that state?. Med Care. 1993;31(11):1002–1012
  18. Baker R, Robinson A. Responses to standard gambles: Are preferences 'well constructed'?. Health Econ. 2004;13(1):37–48

 Supported by the Norwegian Research Council.

PII: S1052-3057(08)00149-3

doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2008.06.009

Journal of Stroke & Cerebrovascular Diseases
Volume 18, Issue 1 , Pages 17-22 , January 2009

Article Tools