Individualized medical decision making: necessary, achievable, but not yet attainable.

The need is urgent to provide older persons with individualized information about the benefits and harms of different diagnostic and treatment strategies. This need results from the growing recognition of the heterogeneity in outcomes in older persons with differing comorbidity profiles. The heterogeneity of benefits and harms resulting from treatment is not yet as well appreciated. Warfarin vs aspirin therapy for the reduction of stroke risk in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation provides an example of a treatment for which the benefit-to-harm ratio may actually reverse according to an older person's comorbidities, thus highlighting the importance of basing this treatment decision on individualized outcome data. Despite the wealth of studies in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, many assumptions are necessary to calculate patient-specific outcomes, and these assumptions may lead to substantial overestimation or underestimation of benefits and harms. Improving care for patients with comorbidities will require substantive increases in the efforts and resources allocated to the collection and dissemination of outcome data for patients with varying comorbidities.

[1]  M. Chin,et al.  The Effect of Comorbid Illness and Functional Status on the Expected Benefits of Intensive Glucose Control in Older Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Decision Analysis , 2008, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[2]  R. Beyth,et al.  Prospective evaluation of an index for predicting the risk of major bleeding in outpatients treated with warfarin. , 1998, The American journal of medicine.

[3]  A. Laupacis,et al.  Development of a decision aid for patients with atrial fibrillation who are considering antithrombotic therapy , 2000, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[4]  Jonathan D Mahnken,et al.  Development of a contemporary bleeding risk model for elderly warfarin recipients. , 2006, Chest.

[5]  M. Tinetti,et al.  The Effect of Age and Chronic Illness on Life Expectancy after a Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer: Implications for Screening , 2006, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[6]  J. Wyatt,et al.  Commentary: Prognostic models: clinically useful or quickly forgotten? , 1995 .

[7]  V. Fuster,et al.  ACC/AHA/ESC Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Executive Summary A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines and Policy Conference , 2001, Circulation.

[8]  Elizabeth H Bradley,et al.  Understanding the treatment preferences of seriously ill patients. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[9]  Sheldon Brown,et al.  Veterans Aging Cohort Study (VACS): Overview and Description , 2006, Medical care.

[10]  S. Sawyer,et al.  Bridging the Gap Between Doctors' and Patients' Expectations of Asthma Management , 2003, The Journal of asthma : official journal of the Association for the Care of Asthma.

[11]  David M Kent,et al.  Limitations of applying summary results of clinical trials to individual patients: the need for risk stratification. , 2007, JAMA.

[12]  G. Lip,et al.  Anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy use in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the need for consensus and a management guideline. , 2006, Chest.

[13]  J R Beck,et al.  A convenient approximation of life expectancy (the "DEALE"). II. Use in medical decision-making. , 1982, The American journal of medicine.

[14]  L. Fraenkel,et al.  A pilot project examining the predicted preferences of patients and physicians in the primary prophylaxis of variceal hemorrhage , 2007, Hepatology.

[15]  N. Miller,et al.  The Medicare Health Outcomes Survey program: Overview, context, and near-term prospects , 2004, Health and quality of life outcomes.

[16]  D. Wysowski,et al.  Bleeding complications with warfarin use: a prevalent adverse effect resulting in regulatory action. , 2007, Archives of internal medicine.

[17]  M. Rich,et al.  Clinical classification schemes for predicting hemorrhage: results from the National Registry of Atrial Fibrillation (NRAF). , 2006, American heart journal.

[18]  M. Tinetti,et al.  Potential pitfalls of disease-specific guidelines for patients with multiple conditions. , 2004, The New England journal of medicine.

[19]  Bruce M Psaty,et al.  Benefits and risks of drug treatments: how to combine the best evidence on benefits with the best data about adverse effects. , 2008, JAMA.

[20]  S. Hernández-Díaz,et al.  Cardioprotective aspirin users and their excess risk of upper gastrointestinal complications , 2006, BMC Medicine.

[21]  Sara J Knight,et al.  Patients' values and clinical substituted judgments: the case of localized prostate cancer. , 2005, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[22]  D. Singer,et al.  Death and disability from warfarin-associated intracranial and extracranial hemorrhages. , 2007, The American journal of medicine.

[23]  M. Tinetti,et al.  Views of Older Persons with Multiple Morbidities on Competing Outcomes and Clinical Decision‐Making , 2008, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[24]  G. Lip,et al.  Combining antiplatelet drugs and oral anticoagulant therapy in atrial fibrillation: acute coronary syndromes and/or percutaneous coronary intervention/stenting revisited. , 2007, Stroke.

[25]  Martha J. Radford,et al.  Validation of Clinical Classification Schemes for Predicting Stroke: Results From the National Registry of Atrial Fibrillation , 2001 .

[26]  A. Laupacis,et al.  Development of a decision aid for atrial fibrillation who are considering antithrombotic therapy. , 2000, Journal of general internal medicine.

[27]  N. Wenger,et al.  End-of-life decision making , 2000, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[28]  S. Hernández-Díaz,et al.  Association between nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding/perforation: an overview of epidemiologic studies published in the 1990s. , 2000, Archives of internal medicine.

[29]  Andrew J Vickers,et al.  Incorporating predictions of individual patient risk in clinical trials. , 2004, Urologic oncology.

[30]  M. Dougados,et al.  Measuring disease activity in ankylosing spondylitis: patient and physician have different perspectives. , 2005, Rheumatology.

[31]  M. Aguilar,et al.  Meta-analysis: Antithrombotic Therapy to Prevent Stroke in Patients Who Have Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation , 2007, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[32]  Daniel Levy,et al.  Arrhythmias: abstractA risk score for predicting stroke or death in individuals with new-onset atrial fibrillation in the community. The Framingham Heart Study☆ , 2003 .

[33]  P. Gorelick.  Combining aspirin with oral anticoagulant therapy: is this a safe and effective practice in patients with atrial fibrillation? , 2007, Stroke.

[34]  Yvonne Vergouwe,et al.  Prognosis and prognostic research: validating a prognostic model , 2009, BMJ : British Medical Journal.