Literature DB >> 15085907

Development and initial validation of a new preference-based disease-specific health-related quality of life instrument for erectile function.

G W Torrance1, M A Keresteci, R W Casey, A J Rosner, N Ryan, M C Breton.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Health-related quality of life instruments may be generic or specific. In general, only generic instruments use preference-based scoring. We report on a novel approach to combine in one instrument the strengths of the specific approach, greater disease relevance and responsiveness, with those of preference-based scoring, generalizability through utilities.
OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to develop a self-administered, preference-based instrument capable of measuring utilities in the disease-specific context of erectile dysfunction (ED).
METHODS: Content derivation/validation began with a literature review. Eight attributes (domains) were selected to provide clinical experts structure for focus group discussion. Four levels describing a continuum of dysfunction-function were defined for each domain. Each domain, including functional levels, was reviewed and modified until consensus was achieved regarding content. This content was then integrated into a preference based scoring instrument using two visual analogue scales (VAS) with which patients rated three 'marker' health states (representing mild, moderate and severe ED), their self-state and a previously validated external marker state. The instrument was pilot tested, and implemented in a clinical trial. Initial validation analyses have been performed.
RESULTS: A self-administered, preference-based, VAS instrument was developed for use in the ED population, and the instrument was feasible to complete, was reliable beyond the threshold of acceptability established a priori and demonstrated good validity. Evidence of these properties accumulates over time and this study begins that process with this instrument. Responsiveness is being assessed in the context of a clinical trial.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15085907     DOI: 10.1023/B:QURE.0000018482.71580.f2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  12 in total

Review 1.  Valuing health-related quality of life. A review of health state valuation techniques.

Authors:  C Green; J Brazier; M Deverill
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Visual analog scales: do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health states?

Authors:  G W Torrance; D Feeny; W Furlong
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2001 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.583

3.  Oral sildenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Sildenafil Study Group.

Authors:  I Goldstein; T F Lue; H Padma-Nathan; R C Rosen; W D Steers; P A Wicker
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1998-05-14       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction.

Authors:  R C Rosen; A Riley; G Wagner; I H Osterloh; J Kirkpatrick; A Mishra
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  Health state utilities in knee replacement surgery: the development and evaluation of McKnee.

Authors:  K J Bennett; G W Torrance; L A Moran; F Smith; C H Goldsmith
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 4.666

6.  Development and use of self-report techniques for assessing sexual functioning: a review and critique.

Authors:  H R Conte
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  1983-12

7.  Cross-cultural development of a quality of life measure for men with erection difficulties.

Authors:  T H Wagner; D L Patrick; S P McKenna; P S Froese
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 8.  Measuring health-related quality of life.

Authors:  G H Guyatt; D H Feeny; D L Patrick
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1993-04-15       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Is there a reliable and valid self-report measure of sexual behavior?

Authors:  B L Andersen; B Broffitt
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  1988-12

Review 10.  Recommendations on health-related quality of life research to support labeling and promotional claims in the United States.

Authors:  D A Revicki; D Osoba; D Fairclough; I Barofsky; R Berzon; N K Leidy; M Rothman
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 3.440

View more
  9 in total

1.  Marker states and a health state prompt provide modest improvements in the reliability and validity of the standard gamble and rating scale in prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Karen E Bremner; George Tomlinson; Murray D Krahn
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-10-03       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Utility Values for the CP-6D, a Cerebral Palsy-Specific Multi-Attribute Utility Instrument, Using a Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Mina Bahrampour; Richard Norman; Joshua Byrnes; Martin Downes; Paul A Scuffham
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  Using existing data to identify candidate items for a health state classification system in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Ayse Kuspinar; Lois Finch; Simon Pickard; Nancy E Mayo
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-12-15       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Self-esteem, confidence, and relationships in men treated with sildenafil citrate for erectile dysfunction: results of two double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.

Authors:  Stanley E Althof; Michael P O' Leary; Joseph C Cappelleri; Sidney Glina; Rosie King; Li-Jung Tseng; Jessica L Bowler
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2006-07-07       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  The use of disease-specific outcome measures in cost-utility analysis: the development of Dutch societal preference weights for the FACT-L scale.

Authors:  Leida M Lamers; Carin A Uyl-de Groot; Ivonne Buijt
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  The impact of adding an extra dimension to a preference-based measure.

Authors:  John Brazier; Donna Rowen; Aki Tsuchiya; Yaling Yang; Tracy A Young
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2011-06-02       Impact factor: 4.634

7.  Preference-based disease-specific health-related quality of life instrument for glaucoma: a mixed methods study protocol.

Authors:  Sergei Muratov; Dominik W Podbielski; Susan M Jack; Iqbal Ike K Ahmed; Levine A H Mitchell; Monika Baltaziak; Feng Xie
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-11-08       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  A comparison of the responsiveness of EQ-5D-5L and the QOLIE-31P and mapping of QOLIE-31P to EQ-5D-5L in epilepsy.

Authors:  Ben F M Wijnen; Iris Mosweu; Marian H J M Majoie; Leone Ridsdale; Reina J A de Kinderen; Silvia M A A Evers; Paul McCrone
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2017-09-04

9.  Do generic utility measures capture what is important to the quality of life of people with multiple sclerosis?

Authors:  Ayse Kuspinar; Nancy E Mayo
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2013-04-25       Impact factor: 3.186

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.