Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Positive Outcomes of Varicose Vein Surgery: The Patient Perspective

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Patient-reported outcomes are increasingly recognized as important to understanding outcomes of medical interventions such as varicose vein surgery (VVS). Our aim was to compare positive outcomes of VVS as defined by several patient-reported measures, and to identify baseline characteristics associated with positive outcomes of VVS.

Methods

A secondary analysis of the UK Patient-Reported Outcome Measures database was conducted on patients undergoing VVS, in the period 2009–2011 who completed the generic EQ-5D (index and visual analog scale [VAS] summary scores) and disease-specific Aberdeen varicose vein questionnaire (AVVQ). Surgical outcome was defined as positive if pre/post change scores exceeded half a standard deviation of mean baseline scores. Logistic regression models were used to identify significant predictors of positive outcomes, including age, gender, and baseline health.

Results

Of 9,113 patients analyzed (71 % females, 57 % aged >50 years), positive outcomes were identified in 62 % using the AVVQ, 43 % based on EQ-5D index scores, and 24 % according to EQ-VAS; 10 % improved on all three measures. Patients with poorer baseline functioning (AVVQ scores ≥11) were more likely to have a positive outcome based on the EQ-5D index (odds ratio [OR] 1.23, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.11–1.36) and EQ-VAS (OR 1.30, 95 % CI 1.14–1.47).

Conclusions

Defining surgery as successful will clearly depend on how health-related quality of life (HRQL) is operationalized and the criteria used to identify meaningful change. Across a range of criteria, a consistently greater proportion of patients had positive outcomes in terms of VV-related functioning (via AVVQ) compared with those who improved in terms of generic health (via EQ-index), or self-rated health (EQ-VAS).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Beebe-Dimmer JL, Pfeifer JR, Engle JS, Schottenfeld D. The epidemiology of chronic venous insufficiency and varicose veins. Ann Epidemiol. 2005;15(3):175–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Moore HM, Lane TR, Thapar A, Franklin IJ, Davies AH. The European burden of primary varicose veins. Phlebology. 2013;28(Suppl 1):141–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. van den Bremer J, Moll FL. Historical overview of varicose vein surgery. Ann Vasc Surg. 2010;24(3):426–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Smith JJ, Garratt AM, Guest M, Greenhalgh RM, Davies AH. Evaluating and improving health-related quality of life in patients with varicose veins. J Vasc Surg. 1999;30(4):710–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lane TR, Sritharan K, Herbert JR, Franklin IJ, Davies AH. Management of chronic venous disease by primary care. Phlebology. 2013;28(6):299–304.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. McDaniel MD, Nehler MR, Santilli SM, Hiatt WR, Regensteiner JG, Goldstone J, et al. Extended outcome assessment in the care of vascular diseases: revising the paradigm for the 21st century. Ad Hoc Committee to Study Outcomes Assessment, Society for Vascular Surgery/International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter. J Vasc Surg. 2000;32(6):1239–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sam RC, MacKenzie RK, Paisley AM, Ruckley CV, Bradbury AW. The effect of superficial venous surgery on generic health-related quality of life. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2004;28(3):253–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Darvall KA, Sam RC, Bate GR, Silverman SH, Adam DJ, Bradbury AW. Changes in health-related quality of life after ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy for great and small saphenous varicose veins. J Vasc Surg. 2010;51(4):913–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med. 2001;33(5):337–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Finalised Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in England—April 2010 to March 2011, Pre- and post-operative data. 2012 [cited 2013 26 April 2013]. Available from: http://www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB07049.

  11. Garratt AM, Macdonald LM, Ruta DA, Russell IT, Buckingham JK, Krukowski ZH. Towards measurement of outcome for patients with varicose veins. Qual Health Care. 1993;2(1):5–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Garratt AM, Ruta DA, Abdalla MI, Russell IT. Responsiveness of the SF-36 and a condition-specific measure of health for patients with varicose veins. Qual Life Res. 1996;5(2):223–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nesbitt C, Wilson WR, Lees TA, Stansby G. Interpretation of patient-reported outcome measures for varicose vein surgery. Phlebology. 2012;27(4):173–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy. 1996;37(1):53–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care. 1997;35(11):1095–108.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Revicki DA, Cella D, Hays RD, Sloan JA, Lenderking WR, Aaronson NK. Responsiveness and minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:70.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pickard AS, Neary MP, Cella D. Estimation of minimally important differences in EQ-5D utility and VAS scores in cancer. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2007;5:70.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Klem TM, Sybrandy JE, Wittens CH. Measurement of health-related quality of life with the Dutch translated Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire before and after treatment. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2009;37(4):470–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Varicose veins in the legs [cited 2014 10 July]. Available from: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG168.

  20. Health Information and Quality Authority. Health Technology Assessment of Scheduled Surgical Procedures [cited 2014 5 July]. Available from: http://irishpatients.ie/news/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/HTA-Varicose-Vein-April-131.pdf.

  21. Berridge D, Bradbury AW, Davies AH, Gohel M, Nyamekye I, Renton S, et al. Recommendations for the referral and treatment of patients with lower limb chronic venous insufficiency (including varicose veins). Phlebology. 2011;26(3):91–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Burton KE, Wright V, Richards J. Patients’ expectations in relation to outcome of total hip replacement surgery. Ann Rheum Dis. 1979;38(5):471–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hopman WM, Mantle M, Towheed TE, MacKenzie TA. Determinants of health-related quality of life following elective total hip replacement. Am J Med Qual. 1999;14(3):110–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Zweig T, Aghayev E, Melloh M, Dietrich D, Roder C. Influence of preoperative leg pain and radiculopathy on outcomes in mono-segmental lumbar total disc replacement: results from a nationwide registry. Eur Spine J. 2012;21(Suppl 6):S729–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lattimer CR, Kalodiki E, Azzam M, Geroulakos G. The Aberdeen varicose vein questionnaire may be the preferred method of rationing patients for varicose vein surgery. Angiology. 2014;65(3):205–9.

  26. Ethgen O, Bruyere O, Richy F, Dardennes C, Reginster JY. Health-related quality of life in total hip and total knee arthroplasty. A qualitative and systematic review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86-A(5):963–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Rolfson O, Dahlberg LE, Nilsson JA, Malchau H, Garellick G. Variables determining outcome in total hip replacement surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91(2):157–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bilberg R, Norgaard B, Overgaard S, Roessler KK. Patient anxiety and concern as predictors for the perceived quality of treatment and patient reported outcome (PRO) in orthopaedic surgery. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:244.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Devlin NJ, Appleby J. Getting the most out of proms: putting health outcomes at the heart of NHS decision-making. London: The King’s Fund, Office of Health Economics; 2010.

  30. Kurz X, Lamping DL, Kahn SR, Baccaglini U, Zuccarelli F, Spreafico G, et al. Do varicose veins affect quality of life? Results of an international population-based study. J Vasc Surg. 2001;34(4):641–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Samuel N, Wallace T, Carradice D, Smith G, Mazari F, Chetter I. Evolution of an endovenous laser ablation practice for varicose veins. Phlebology. 2013;28(5):248–56.

  32. Hutchings A, Grosse Frie K, Neuburger J, van der Meulen J, Black N. Late response to patient-reported outcome questionnaires after surgery was associated with worse outcome. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(2):218–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care. 2003;41(5):582–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Walters SJ, Brazier JE. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res. 2005;14(6):1523–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Cheung YT, Foo YL, Shwe M, Tan YP, Fan G, Yong WS, et al. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the functional assessment of cancer therapy: cognitive function (FACT-Cog) in breast cancer patients. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(7):811–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Farivar SS, Liu H, Hays RD. Half standard deviation estimate of the minimally important difference in HRQOL scores? Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2004;4(5):515–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hays RD, Brodsky M, Johnston MF, Spritzer KL, Hui KK. Evaluating the statistical significance of health-related quality-of-life change in individual patients. Eval Health Prof. 2005;28(2):160–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

All authors contributed to the conceptualization of the study. WHC, HP, WJL, and FJL conducted the analysis. All authors were responsible for interpretation of the results. WHC and ASP drafted the manuscript, and all authors edited and approved of the final version.

Disclosures

Haridarshan Patel was supported by a fellowship funded by Takeda Pharmaceuticals. This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes and Policy, College of Pharmacy, University of Illinois at Chicago, 833, S. Wood Street, M/C 886, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA

    Wei-Han Cheng, Haridarshan Patel, Wan-Ju Lee, Fang-Ju Lin & A. Simon Pickard

  2. Center for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomic Research, University of Illinois at Chicago, 833, S. Wood Street, M/C 886, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA

    Haridarshan Patel & A. Simon Pickard

Authors
  1. Wei-Han Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Haridarshan Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wan-Ju Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fang-Ju Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. A. Simon Pickard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Simon Pickard.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 98 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cheng, WH., Patel, H., Lee, WJ. et al. Positive Outcomes of Varicose Vein Surgery: The Patient Perspective. Patient 8, 329–337 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-014-0092-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-014-0092-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation