Practice patterns of endovenous ablation therapy for the treatment of venous reflux disease

on behalf of the American Venous Forum

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective The purpose of this study was to assess practice patterns of endovenous ablation therapy for the treatment of venous reflux disease among the vein specialist members of the American Venous Forum (AVF). Methods An online survey was conducted of AVF members designed to identify demographics, treatment practices, and clinical variables in the selection of vein ablation devices. Results The survey was distributed to 798 practicing physicians, of whom 129 (16%) responded. The specialty distribution of respondents was as follows: vascular surgeons, 54%; phlebologists, 14%; general surgeons, 11%; interventional radiologists, 9%; and other specialties, 6%. The majority (81%) were from the United States, and 65% were self-employed. Almost half (47%) were in practice for >20 years, with 33% of all respondents performing three to five saphenous vein ablations per week. Three-quarters (79%) of respondents preferred radiofrequency ablation (RFA), with 47% believing that it was more cost-effective and more than half (57%) reporting improved patient satisfaction with this technique. Most of them (63%) responded that previous capital investment played a significant role in their choice of vein ablation device along with the associated cost of disposable equipment. A large majority (77%) of physicians responded that they had a significant role in choosing the treatment device, whereas only 17% thought that patients’ choice played a major role in device choice. The capital investment affected choice of modality more significantly in newer practices (P <.0.5). Conclusions The majority of AVF vein specialists prefer an RFA technique to laser, believing that RFA is associated with improved patient outcomes and is more cost-effective. Advances in technology, device costs, and reimbursement levels may have an impact on such preferences in the future.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)75-81.e1
JournalJournal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders
Volume5
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2017

Fingerprint

Veins
Equipment and Supplies
Costs and Cost Analysis
Disposable Equipment
Economics
Ablation Techniques
Physicians
Therapeutics
Saphenous Vein
Patient Satisfaction
Blood Vessels
Lasers
Demography
Surveys and Questionnaires
Technology
Surgeons

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

@article{771afbd38b0040ab925b89c71e6027fb,
title = "Practice patterns of endovenous ablation therapy for the treatment of venous reflux disease",
abstract = "Objective The purpose of this study was to assess practice patterns of endovenous ablation therapy for the treatment of venous reflux disease among the vein specialist members of the American Venous Forum (AVF). Methods An online survey was conducted of AVF members designed to identify demographics, treatment practices, and clinical variables in the selection of vein ablation devices. Results The survey was distributed to 798 practicing physicians, of whom 129 (16{\%}) responded. The specialty distribution of respondents was as follows: vascular surgeons, 54{\%}; phlebologists, 14{\%}; general surgeons, 11{\%}; interventional radiologists, 9{\%}; and other specialties, 6{\%}. The majority (81{\%}) were from the United States, and 65{\%} were self-employed. Almost half (47{\%}) were in practice for >20 years, with 33{\%} of all respondents performing three to five saphenous vein ablations per week. Three-quarters (79{\%}) of respondents preferred radiofrequency ablation (RFA), with 47{\%} believing that it was more cost-effective and more than half (57{\%}) reporting improved patient satisfaction with this technique. Most of them (63{\%}) responded that previous capital investment played a significant role in their choice of vein ablation device along with the associated cost of disposable equipment. A large majority (77{\%}) of physicians responded that they had a significant role in choosing the treatment device, whereas only 17{\%} thought that patients’ choice played a major role in device choice. The capital investment affected choice of modality more significantly in newer practices (P <.0.5). Conclusions The majority of AVF vein specialists prefer an RFA technique to laser, believing that RFA is associated with improved patient outcomes and is more cost-effective. Advances in technology, device costs, and reimbursement levels may have an impact on such preferences in the future.",
author = "{on behalf of the American Venous Forum} and Faisal Aziz and Jose Diaz and John Blebea and Fedor Lurie",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jvsv.2016.08.006",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "5",
pages = "75--81.e1",
journal = "Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders",
issn = "2213-333X",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

Practice patterns of endovenous ablation therapy for the treatment of venous reflux disease. / on behalf of the American Venous Forum.

In: Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders, Vol. 5, No. 1, 01.01.2017, p. 75-81.e1.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Practice patterns of endovenous ablation therapy for the treatment of venous reflux disease

AU - on behalf of the American Venous Forum

AU - Aziz, Faisal

AU - Diaz, Jose

AU - Blebea, John

AU - Lurie, Fedor

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - Objective The purpose of this study was to assess practice patterns of endovenous ablation therapy for the treatment of venous reflux disease among the vein specialist members of the American Venous Forum (AVF). Methods An online survey was conducted of AVF members designed to identify demographics, treatment practices, and clinical variables in the selection of vein ablation devices. Results The survey was distributed to 798 practicing physicians, of whom 129 (16%) responded. The specialty distribution of respondents was as follows: vascular surgeons, 54%; phlebologists, 14%; general surgeons, 11%; interventional radiologists, 9%; and other specialties, 6%. The majority (81%) were from the United States, and 65% were self-employed. Almost half (47%) were in practice for >20 years, with 33% of all respondents performing three to five saphenous vein ablations per week. Three-quarters (79%) of respondents preferred radiofrequency ablation (RFA), with 47% believing that it was more cost-effective and more than half (57%) reporting improved patient satisfaction with this technique. Most of them (63%) responded that previous capital investment played a significant role in their choice of vein ablation device along with the associated cost of disposable equipment. A large majority (77%) of physicians responded that they had a significant role in choosing the treatment device, whereas only 17% thought that patients’ choice played a major role in device choice. The capital investment affected choice of modality more significantly in newer practices (P <.0.5). Conclusions The majority of AVF vein specialists prefer an RFA technique to laser, believing that RFA is associated with improved patient outcomes and is more cost-effective. Advances in technology, device costs, and reimbursement levels may have an impact on such preferences in the future.

AB - Objective The purpose of this study was to assess practice patterns of endovenous ablation therapy for the treatment of venous reflux disease among the vein specialist members of the American Venous Forum (AVF). Methods An online survey was conducted of AVF members designed to identify demographics, treatment practices, and clinical variables in the selection of vein ablation devices. Results The survey was distributed to 798 practicing physicians, of whom 129 (16%) responded. The specialty distribution of respondents was as follows: vascular surgeons, 54%; phlebologists, 14%; general surgeons, 11%; interventional radiologists, 9%; and other specialties, 6%. The majority (81%) were from the United States, and 65% were self-employed. Almost half (47%) were in practice for >20 years, with 33% of all respondents performing three to five saphenous vein ablations per week. Three-quarters (79%) of respondents preferred radiofrequency ablation (RFA), with 47% believing that it was more cost-effective and more than half (57%) reporting improved patient satisfaction with this technique. Most of them (63%) responded that previous capital investment played a significant role in their choice of vein ablation device along with the associated cost of disposable equipment. A large majority (77%) of physicians responded that they had a significant role in choosing the treatment device, whereas only 17% thought that patients’ choice played a major role in device choice. The capital investment affected choice of modality more significantly in newer practices (P <.0.5). Conclusions The majority of AVF vein specialists prefer an RFA technique to laser, believing that RFA is associated with improved patient outcomes and is more cost-effective. Advances in technology, device costs, and reimbursement levels may have an impact on such preferences in the future.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85006118692&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85006118692&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jvsv.2016.08.006

DO - 10.1016/j.jvsv.2016.08.006

M3 - Article

C2 - 27987615

AN - SCOPUS:85006118692

VL - 5

SP - 75-81.e1

JO - Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders

JF - Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders

SN - 2213-333X

IS - 1

ER -