Literature DB >> 18224459

The feasibility and responsiveness of the health utilities index in patients with early-stage breast cancer: a prospective longitudinal study.

Peter J Lovrics1, Sylvie D Cornacchi, Francesco Barnabi, Tim Whelan, Charles H Goldsmith.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The health utilities index (HUI3) is a health measurement instrument based on individuals' preferences for different health states. Breast cancer (BC) is common, with a high proportion of long-term survivors, making evaluation of treatment effects important. Feasibility and responsiveness of HUI3 was compared to the short-form 36 (SF-36) in patients with BC.
METHODS: HUI3 and SF-36 were administered eight times: at initial surgical consultation, 1 week before surgery; 1 week, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after surgery. Effect size, analysis of variance, and Pearson product moment correlations were calculated. BC data were compared to normative values.
RESULTS: Eighty-five patients were enrolled. Ninety-one percent of planned assessments were completed. HUI3 showed significant responsiveness (P < 0.01) after surgery and during recovery. HUI3 scores correlated with SF-36 scores. Comparison to normative data demonstrated the significant detrimental effect of BC diagnosis. Results showed long-term effects of treatment on physical health and positive effects on mental/emotional health in BC survivors. CONCLUSION(S): HUI3 was found to be feasible and responsive in our cohort of BC patients. Changes in HUI3 values over time, and compared to normative data, paralleled SF-36 scores. HUI3 is a valuable tool in health-related quality of life and cost-utility studies in patients with BC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18224459     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-007-9305-2

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


  44 in total

1.  On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation.

Authors:  C B Terwee; F W Dekker; W M Wiersinga; M F Prummel; P M M Bossuyt
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 2.  EuroQol: the current state of play.

Authors:  R Brooks
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 2.980

3.  Users' guides to the medical literature. XII. How to use articles about health-related quality of life. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.

Authors:  G H Guyatt; C D Naylor; E Juniper; D K Heyland; R Jaeschke; D J Cook
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-04-16       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Life after breast cancer: understanding women's health-related quality of life and sexual functioning.

Authors:  P A Ganz; J H Rowland; K Desmond; B E Meyerowitz; G E Wyatt
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Canadian normative data for the SF-36 health survey. Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study Research Group.

Authors:  W M Hopman; T Towheed; T Anastassiades; A Tenenhouse; S Poliquin; C Berger; L Joseph; J P Brown; T M Murray; J D Adachi; D A Hanley; E Papadimitropoulos
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2000-08-08       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Quality of life in survivors of colorectal carcinoma.

Authors:  S D Ramsey; M R Andersen; R Etzioni; C Moinpour; S Peacock; A Potosky; N Urban
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-03-15       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Health Utilities Index Mark 3: evidence of construct validity for stroke and arthritis in a population health survey.

Authors:  P Grootendorst; D Feeny; W Furlong
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 2.983

Review 8.  Evaluating the outcome of treatment. Shouldn't We be asking patients if they are better?

Authors:  J G Wright
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  Risk, severity and predictors of physical and psychological morbidity after axillary lymph node dissection for breast cancer.

Authors:  J M Ververs; R M Roumen; A J Vingerhoets; G Vreugdenhil; J W Coebergh; M A Crommelin; E J Luiten; O J Repelaer van Driel; M Schijven; J C Wissing; A C Voogd
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 9.162

10.  Eighteen-year results in the treatment of early breast carcinoma with mastectomy versus breast conservation therapy: the National Cancer Institute Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Matthew M Poggi; David N Danforth; Linda C Sciuto; Sharon L Smith; Seth M Steinberg; David J Liewehr; Cynthia Menard; Marc E Lippman; Allen S Lichter; Rosemary M Altemus
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2003-08-15       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  3 in total

1.  Evidence-Based Surgery. Users' guide to the surgical literature: how to assess an article on health-related quality of life.

Authors:  Achilleas Thoma; Sylvie D Cornacchi; Peter J Lovrics; Charlie H Goldsmith
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.089

2.  Factors influencing quality of life in patients with benign primary brain tumors: prior to and following surgery.

Authors:  Shiow-Luan Tsay; Jui-Yen Chang; Patsy Yates; Kuan-Chia Lin; Shu-Yuan Liang
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-11-24       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Breast Cancer in Young Women: Health State Utility Impacts by Race/Ethnicity.

Authors:  Justin G Trogdon; Donatus U Ekwueme; Linda Chamiec-Case; Gery P Guy
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 5.043

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.