Literature DB >> 15586840

A comparison of four indirect methods of assessing utility values in rheumatoid arthritis.

Carlo A Marra1, John M Esdaile, Daphne Guh, Jacek A Kopec, John E Brazier, Barry E Koehler, Andrew Chalmers, Aslam H Anis.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Utility scores can be assessed indirectly using preference-based instruments and used as weightings for quality-adjusted life years in economic analyses. It is not clear whether available instruments yield similar results or what domains of health are contributing to the overall score in a sample of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
SUBJECTS: Our study included 313 individuals with rheumatologist-confirmed RA. MEASURES: A self-completed survey that permitted scoring of 4 indirect utility instruments (the Health Utilities Index Mark 2 and 3 (HUI-2 and HUI-3), the EuroQoL (EQ-5D), and the Short Form 6D (SF-6D) was the basis of our study.
RESULTS: Mean (standard deviation) global utility scores were 0.63 (0.24) for the SF-6D, 0.66 (0.13) for the EQ-5D, 0.71 (0.19) for the HUI-2, and 0.53 (0.29) for the HUI-3 (P = 0.02 by repeated-measures analysis of variance). The intraclass correlation across all the indices was 0.67 (95% confidence interval 0.62-0.71). Bland-Altman plots revealed that agreement among instruments was poor at lower utility values. In this elderly RA sample, all of the global utilities mostly measured functional ability and pain.
CONCLUSIONS: There are significant differences in utilities obtained from different indirect methods. Agreement among the instruments was moderate but poorer at lower utilities. It is unlikely that these utility values, if used as the weightings for quality-adjusted life years, would result in comparable estimates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15586840     DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200411000-00012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  41 in total

1.  A comparison of the ICECAP-O with EQ-5D in a falls prevention clinical setting: are they complements or substitutes?

Authors:  Jennifer C Davis; Teresa Liu-Ambrose; Chris G Richardson; Stirling Bryan
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-06-22       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Treatment and nontreatment predictors of health assessment questionnaire disability progression in rheumatoid arthritis: a longitudinal study of 18,485 patients.

Authors:  Kaleb Michaud; Gene Wallenstein; Frederick Wolfe
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2010-11-15       Impact factor: 4.794

3.  Agreement about identifying patients who change over time: cautionary results in cataract and heart failure patients.

Authors:  David Feeny; Karen Spritzer; Ron D Hays; Honghu Liu; Theodore G Ganiats; Robert M Kaplan; Mari Palta; Dennis G Fryback
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  Measuring preferences for cost-utility analysis: how choice of method may influence decision-making.

Authors:  Christine M McDonough; Anna N A Tosteson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Reliability, validity, and minimally important differences of the SF-6D in systemic sclerosis.

Authors:  Dinesh Khanna; Daniel E Furst; Weng Kee Wong; Joel Tsevat; Philip J Clements; Grace S Park; Arnold E Postlethwaite; Mansoor Ahmed; Shaari Ginsburg; Ron D Hays
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-04-03       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  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

7.  How consistent are health utility values?

Authors:  Pedro L Ferreira; Lara N Ferreira; Luis N Pereira
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2008-08-08       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Health state preference scores for children with permanent childhood hearing loss: a comparative analysis of the QWB and HUI3.

Authors:  Laura Smith-Olinde; Scott D Grosse; Frank Olinde; Patti F Martin; John M Tilford
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2008-05-17       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 9.  Cost effectiveness of therapeutic interventions in ankylosing spondylitis: a critical and systematic review.

Authors:  Cécile Gaujoux-Viala; Bruno Fautrel
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2012-12-01       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  The comparative responsiveness of the EQ-5D and SF-6D to change in patients with inflammatory arthritis.

Authors:  M J Harrison; L M Davies; N J Bansback; M J McCoy; S M M Verstappen; K Watson; D P M Symmons
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-09-24       Impact factor: 4.147

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.