Assessment of hemostatic effectiveness (efficacy analysis set, N=54).
Treatment type | N of assessments (%) | N of patients (%)b) |
---|---|---|
Treatment of bleedinga) | ||
Total | 66 | 25c) |
None | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
Fair | 11 (16.7) | 7 (28.0) |
Good | 50 (75.8) | 17 (68.0) |
Excellent | 5 (7.6) | 4 (16.0) |
Effective (excellent+good) | 55 (83.3) | 18 (72.0) |
Prophylaxisa) | ||
Total | 76 | 40c) |
None | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
Fair | 8 (10.5) | 5 (12.5) |
Good | 47 (61.8) | 32 (80.0) |
Excellent | 21 (27.6) | 17 (42.5) |
Effective (excellent+good) | 68 (89.5) | 35 (87.5) |
Overall treatment typea) | ||
Total | 142 | 54c) |
None | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
Fair | 19 (13.4) | 12 (22.2) |
Good | 97 (68.3) | 43 (79.6) |
Excellent | 26 (18.3) | 20 (37.0) |
Effective (excellent+good) | 123 (86.6) | 42 (77.8) |
a)In case an assessment is performed by the patient as well as by the physician, then the worst-case assessment is considered. b)For the ratings “None,” “Fair,” “Good,” or “Excellent,” each patient could rate more often. For the rating “Good” or “Excellent,” in case a patient had more than one assessment, the worst-case assessment is considered for this patient. c)Number of unique patients with an effectiveness assessment available in the respective “Treatment type/Assessor.”