Table 4.
Patient satisfaction and perceived improvement after treatment
| SAP | TAP | P* | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 months’ follow-up | n = 202 | n = 197 | |
| ȃPatient satisfaction (score 0–10), mean (95% c.i.) | 8.2 (8.0, 8.3) | 8.3 (8.2, 8.4) | |
| ȃPerceived improvement | 0.793 | ||
| ȃȃNo improvement at all | 4 (1.8) | 5 (2.1) | |
| ȃȃSome improvement | 63 (27.8) | 56 (23.6) | |
| ȃȃMajor improvement | 135 (59.5) | 136 (57.4) | |
| 12 months’ follow-up | n = 173 | n = 177 | |
| ȃPatient satisfaction (score 0–10), mean (95% c.i.) | 8.4 (8.2, 8.6) | 8.6 (8.4, 8.7) | |
| ȃPerceived improvement | 0.563 | ||
| ȃȃNo improvement at all | 8 (3.5) | 5 (2.1) | |
| ȃȃSome improvement | 36 (15.9) | 33 (13.9) | |
| ȃȃMajor improvement | 129 (56.8) | 139 (58.6) |
Values are n (%), unless indicated otherwise. SAP, isolated ambulatory phlebectomy with or without delayed endovenous truncal ablation; TAP, thermal ablation with concomitant phlebectomy. Patient satisfaction scores were analyzed in a multilevel repeated-measures model. *χ2 test.