Publications
Department of Medicine faculty members published more than 3,600 peer-reviewed articles in 2024.
2016
2016
2016
2016
2016
2016
OBJECTIVE
To improve our understanding of patients' treatment preferences for chronic hepatitis C (HCV).
METHODS
Subjects with HCV were recruited from 2 VA medical centers. Preferences were ascertained using conjoint analysis. We used segmentation analysis to examine whether there were groups of respondents with similar preferences that were systematically different from the preferences of others. We then measured the associations between treatment preference with subjects' characteristics and their gist principles related to living with HCV and the burden of therapy.
RESULTS
A total of 199 subjects participated in this study. The segmentation analysis demonstrated that subjects could be classified into 2 distinct groups. The larger group [group 1, n=118 (59%)] opted for current treatment and the other [group 2, n=81 (41%)] preferred to defer. Patients with cirrhosis were less likely to belong to group 2 (prefer to defer) compared with those without cirrhosis (40.5% vs. 21.3%), whereas subjects self-identifying as African American were more likely to belong to group 2 than white subjects (51.3% vs. 30.5%). Members of group 1 had a more positive overall gist principles related to HCV compared with members of group 2 [mean (SD) score=28.63 (3.06) vs. 26.46 (2.79), P<0.0001]. These gist principles mediated the relationship between race and treatment preference (Sobel test statistic=-2.68, 2-tailed P=0.007).
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings indicate that there are groups of HCV patients with similar preferences that are distinct from other groups' preferences. Patients' gist principles related to the significance of having a chronic viral infection and the burdens of therapy are strongly related to their current treatment decisions. These findings help inform how best to initiate and deliver treatment for patients with HCV.
View on PubMed2016
INTRODUCTION
Colonoscopic surveillance guidelines for serrated polyps (SPs) are predicated upon the histologic characteristics of the index polyp. However, discrimination between SP subtypes [hyperplastic polyps vs. sessile serrated adenoma/polyps (SSA/P)] is often unreliable.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We studied the impact of (1) a novel tissue orientation method, performed in the endoscopy laboratory, whereby polyps are flattened in a small paper envelope immediately after resection (modified protocol); and (2) 2012 consensus-modified criteria (CM-2012). These interventions were compared with conventional tissue-handling protocol (CP) and traditional 2008 World Health Organization criteria (WHO). Twenty blinded community pathologists from around the United States scored 100, independent, 0.5 to 2.0 cm, proximal colonic SPs randomly selected from a 2-site tissue section archive. We compared interobserver agreement and diagnostic grading.
RESULTS
Interobserver agreement was higher using CM-2012 than WHO criteria (absolute agreement: 13% vs. 4%, P<0.01; 75% agreement: 54% vs. 38%, P<0.01). Interobserver agreement was higher with the modified protocol than with CP (WHO absolute agreement: 6% vs. 2%, P>0.05; WHO 75% agreement: 46% vs. 30%, P>0.05, and CM-2012 absolute agreement: 20% vs. 6%, P=0.07; CM-2012 75% agreement: 66% vs. 42%, P=0.03). Compared with WHO, use of CM-2012 criteria resulted in fewer diagnoses of "indeterminate"; more diagnoses of SSA/P (P<0.01); and "upgraded" the diagnosis from hyperplastic polyps to SSA/P in approximately 7% of cases. These observations were independent of polyp size, patient gender, and study site.
CONCLUSIONS
Simple enhancements to postresection SP handling and diagnostic criteria markedly improve interobserver agreement of SP diagnosis among nongastrointestinal community pathologists. This finding, if confirmed, has important implications for SP colonoscopy surveillance guidelines.
View on PubMed