PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 8693425

Decision analysis in surgery.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The technique of decision analysis is often applied to clinical policy and economic issues in surgery. Because surgeons may be unfamiliar with such work, this article catalogues decision analysis studies in the surgical specialties. METHODS: We reviewed the medical literature (1966 to 1994) to identify surgical decision analysis studies and to assess trends over time. Each article was categorized according to the type of journal (surgical, other clinical, or technical) in which it was published and content, including surgical specialty, clinical topic, article focus (individual patient decision making, clinical policy, or cost-effectiveness), and primary findings. RESULTS: Publication rates of surgical decision analysis have increased dramatically over time. Of the 86 total studies only six were published before 1980. In contrast, 44 studies appeared between 1990 and 1994. Although 77% were published in nonsurgical journals, decision analyses have begun to appear more regularly in surgical forums. Studies addressing all of the surgical specialties were found, although more than one half addressed topics in general surgery (34%) or cardiothoracic surgery (22%). The most frequent topics were gallstones (11 articles), head and neck cancer (five articles), coronary artery disease (four articles), and cerebral arteriovenous malformations (four articles). Articles focusing on clinical policy (i.e., those assessing surgical efficacy for broad groups of patients) now account for large majority of published decision analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The use of decision analysis in surgery is growing steadily. Because decision analysis is being used to influence clinical policy, it is important for surgeons to be aware of these studies and to be able to review them critically.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J D Birkmeyer, N O Birkmeyer. 1996. Decision analysis in surgery.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0039-6060(96)80234-0

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Decision-analysis of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt versus distal splenorenal shunt for portal hypertension.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and surgical distal splenorenal shunt (DSRS) are treatments for complications of portal hypertension. TIPS is widely used because it is relatively easy to place. Because TIPS may malfunction over time, it is unclear whether TIPS is superior to DSRS in patients with Child's class A cirrhosis who enjoy a longer survival. This study compared the cost-effectiveness of TIPS to DSRS for portal hypertension in Child's class A cirrhosis. A decision analysis model was used to evaluate the number of procedures, life expectancy, and costs over the first 2 years in patients with Child's class A cirrhosis who underwent a TIPS or DSRS. Patients who received TIPS survived 1.96 years, required 1.7 procedures, and incurred $41,685 in costs. Patients who underwent a DSRS survived 1.86 years, required 1.0 procedure, and incurred $26,951 in costs. The cost-effectiveness of TIPS compared with DSRS was $147,340 per life-year saved. Adjusting the rate of TIPS dysfunction, 1-year survival, or the number of ultrasounds to detect TIPS dysfunction did not change the results. In patients with Child's class A cirrhosis, DSRS is a more cost-effective treatment than TIPS. Until the results of a randomized controlled trial comparing TIPS with DSRS are available, TIPS should be regarded as experimental and prohibitively expensive in Child's class A cirrhosis.

Decision Support Techniques