Literature DB >> 11124732

Preference-based health outcome measures in low back pain.

A N Tosteson1.   

Abstract

Preference-based health outcome measures were considered in two settings. In the clinical context, utility assessment using the VAS, TTO or SG was described. It is recognized that formal utility assessment is generally not needed in day-to-day clinical practice. When the need to explicitly value alternative health outcomes arises, the VAS is recommended because of its ease of implementation. In the health policy context, preference classification systems are recommended for valuing health when a cost-effectiveness analysis of alternative health care interventions is planned. At present, there is little evidence to base choice of one system over another for assessing the cost-effectiveness of low back pain interventions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11124732     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  10 in total

1.  Good brace compliance reduced curve progression and surgical rates in patients with idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Jens Ivar Brox; Johan Emil Lange; Ragnhild Beate Gunderson; Harald Steen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-06-04       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  Health related quality of life outcome instruments.

Authors:  Gunnar Németh
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-12-01       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  A longitudinal comparison of 5 preference-weighted health state classification systems in persons with intervertebral disk herniation.

Authors:  Christine M McDonough; Tor D Tosteson; Anna N A Tosteson; Alan M Jette; Margaret R Grove; James N Weinstein
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2010-11-22       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  Clinical decision analysis: an alternate, rigorous approach to making clinical decisions and developing treatment recommendations.

Authors:  Gabrielle van der Velde
Journal:  J Can Chiropr Assoc       Date:  2005-12

5.  Comparison of EQ-5D, HUI, and SF-36-derived societal health state values among spine patient outcomes research trial (SPORT) participants.

Authors:  Christine M McDonough; Margaret R Grove; Tor D Tosteson; Jon D Lurie; Alan S Hilibrand; Anna N A Tosteson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Individualized chiropractic and integrative care for low back pain: the design of a randomized clinical trial using a mixed-methods approach.

Authors:  Kristine K Westrom; Michele J Maiers; Roni L Evans; Gert Bronfort
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2010-03-08       Impact factor: 2.279

7.  Functional outcome after lumbar closing wedge osteotomy in ankylosing spondylitis.

Authors:  Jens Ivar Brox; Arthur Helle; Roger Sørensen; Ragnhild Gunderson; Rolf Riise; Olav Reikerås
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-05-28       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Long-term results after Boston brace treatment in late-onset juvenile and adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Johan Emil Lange; Harald Steen; Ragnhild Gunderson; Jens Ivar Brox
Journal:  Scoliosis       Date:  2011-08-31

9.  Validation of the Brazilian-Portuguese version of the Gesture Behavior Test for patients with non-specific chronic low back pain.

Authors:  Ricardo Furtado; Anamaria Jones; Rita N V Furtado; Fábio Jennings; Jamil Natour
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.365

10.  Long-term results after Boston brace treatment in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Johan Emil Lange; Harald Steen; Jens Ivar Brox
Journal:  Scoliosis       Date:  2009-08-26
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.