J D Fisk1, M G Brown, I S Sketris, L M Metz, T J Murray, K J Stadnyk. 1. Abbie J. Lane Building, Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Veterans Memorial Lane, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 2E3, Canada. john.fisk@cdha.nshealth.ca
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the practical application and psychometric properties of three health utility measures in a sample of MS patients with a broad range of neurological disability as measured by the Extended Disability Status Scale (EDSS). METHODS: Patients randomly selected from two MS clinic registries were assessed using standard clinical methods and completed three generic measures of health utility (EQ-5D, HUI Mark III, SF-6D). The proportion of missing data, test/retest reliability, and construct validity of each health utility measure were examined. RESULTS: The assessments were completed by 187 patients. Less than 10% of data were missing for the subscales of the SF-6D (< 3.2%), HUI Mark III (<1.6%), and EQ-5D (< or =7.5%). Severely disabled patients were more likely to omit physical function questions for the SF-6D (20%), and EQ-5D (43%). Retest reliability for the SF-6D (ICC = 0.83), EQ-5D (ICC = 0.81), and HUI Mark III (ICC = 0.87) were adequate for population surveys. Correlations between assessment of clinical function and each health utility measure were strongest for the HUI Mark III (HUI Mark III EDSS rho = -0.77, HUI Mark III ambulation index rho = -0.76, HUI Mark III timed 25 foot walk rho = -0.73, HUI Mark III nine hole peg test rho = -0.65). CONCLUSIONS: The health utility measures were generally feasible and reliable but the HUI Mark III demonstrated highest concordance with the EDSS across the full range of neurological disability. Of the three measures studied, the HUI Mark III may be the most appropriate for cost effectiveness evaluations of MS therapies.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the practical application and psychometric properties of three health utility measures in a sample of MS patients with a broad range of neurological disability as measured by the Extended Disability Status Scale (EDSS). METHODS:Patients randomly selected from two MS clinic registries were assessed using standard clinical methods and completed three generic measures of health utility (EQ-5D, HUI Mark III, SF-6D). The proportion of missing data, test/retest reliability, and construct validity of each health utility measure were examined. RESULTS: The assessments were completed by 187 patients. Less than 10% of data were missing for the subscales of the SF-6D (< 3.2%), HUI Mark III (<1.6%), and EQ-5D (< or =7.5%). Severely disabled patients were more likely to omit physical function questions for the SF-6D (20%), and EQ-5D (43%). Retest reliability for the SF-6D (ICC = 0.83), EQ-5D (ICC = 0.81), and HUI Mark III (ICC = 0.87) were adequate for population surveys. Correlations between assessment of clinical function and each health utility measure were strongest for the HUI Mark III (HUI Mark III EDSS rho = -0.77, HUI Mark III ambulation index rho = -0.76, HUI Mark III timed 25 foot walk rho = -0.73, HUI Mark III nine hole peg test rho = -0.65). CONCLUSIONS: The health utility measures were generally feasible and reliable but the HUI Mark III demonstrated highest concordance with the EDSS across the full range of neurological disability. Of the three measures studied, the HUI Mark III may be the most appropriate for cost effectiveness evaluations of MS therapies.
Authors: S L Hauser; D M Dawson; J R Lehrich; M F Beal; S V Kevy; R D Propper; J A Mills; H L Weiner Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1983-01-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: C M Poser; D W Paty; L Scheinberg; W I McDonald; F A Davis; G C Ebers; K P Johnson; W A Sibley; D H Silberberg; W W Tourtellotte Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 1983-03 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Oriol Cunillera; Ricard Tresserras; Luis Rajmil; Gemma Vilagut; Pilar Brugulat; Mike Herdman; Anna Mompart; Antonia Medina; Yolanda Pardo; Jordi Alonso; John Brazier; Montse Ferrer Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-03-31 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Regina Rendas-Baum; Min Yang; Francoise Cattelin; Gene V Wallenstein; John D Fisk Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-07-10 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: V Isella; C Mapelli; N Morielli; D De Gaspari; C Siri; G Pezzoli; A Antonini; M Poletti; U Bonuccelli; L Picchi; A Napolitano; M Vista; M Veglia; F Piamarta; F Grassi; I M Appollonio Journal: Funct Neurol Date: 2013 Apr-May
Authors: Shannon Pike; Anne Cusick; Kylie Wales; Lisa Cameron; Lynne Turner-Stokes; Stephen Ashford; Natasha A Lannin Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-02-11 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Liam M Hannan; David G T Whitehurst; Stirling Bryan; Jeremy D Road; Christine F McDonald; David J Berlowitz; Mark E Howard Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-03-02 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: C Scaratti; M Leonardi; A Saladino; E Anghileri; M Broggi; E Lamperti; L Fariselli; R Ayadi; G Tringali; S Schiavolin Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-02-15 Impact factor: 3.603