OBJECTIVE: To assess the cross-sectional construct validity of the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) in Alzheimer disease (AD), arthritis (AR), and cataracts (CA). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The 1996-97 Canadian National Population Health Survey for community and institution-dwelling respondents aged 40 years and above was used in the study. Adjusted means for overall and single-attribute HUI3 scores of five subgroups were compared: (1) AD only, (2) AR only, (3) CA only, (4) at least two of the three conditions, and (5) none of the three (reference group). Regression analyses were conducted for community and institutional data to obtain adjusted mean utility scores. RESULTS: Of the 76 a priori hypotheses, 55 were confirmed. HUI3 was able to describe overall burdens of AD, AR, and CA as well as vision problems associated with CA, speech and cognition problems associated with AD, and ambulation and pain problems associated with AR. Adjusted mean differences in overall HUI3 scores between AD, AR, or CA only groups and reference group ranged from -0.04 to -0.42 (P<0.05); all differences were quantitatively important. CONCLUSION: HUI3 is useful in assessing the health-related quality of life of AD, AR, and CA of those living in the community and institutions.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the cross-sectional construct validity of the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) in Alzheimer disease (AD), arthritis (AR), and cataracts (CA). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The 1996-97 Canadian National Population Health Survey for community and institution-dwelling respondents aged 40 years and above was used in the study. Adjusted means for overall and single-attribute HUI3 scores of five subgroups were compared: (1) AD only, (2) AR only, (3) CA only, (4) at least two of the three conditions, and (5) none of the three (reference group). Regression analyses were conducted for community and institutional data to obtain adjusted mean utility scores. RESULTS: Of the 76 a priori hypotheses, 55 were confirmed. HUI3 was able to describe overall burdens of AD, AR, and CA as well as vision problems associated with CA, speech and cognition problems associated with AD, and ambulation and pain problems associated with AR. Adjusted mean differences in overall HUI3 scores between AD, AR, or CA only groups and reference group ranged from -0.04 to -0.42 (P<0.05); all differences were quantitatively important. CONCLUSION: HUI3 is useful in assessing the health-related quality of life of AD, AR, and CA of those living in the community and institutions.
Authors: David Feeny; Rochelle Garner; Julie Bernier; Amanda Thompson; Bentson H McFarland; Nathalie Huguet; Mark S Kaplan; Nancy A Ross; Chris M Blanchard Journal: J Phys Act Health Date: 2013-10-31
Authors: Robert M Kaplan; Steven Tally; Ron D Hays; David Feeny; Theodore G Ganiats; Mari Palta; Dennis G Fryback Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2010-08-04 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Mark S Kaplan; Nathalie Huguet; David Feeny; Bentson H McFarland; Raul Caetano; Julie Bernier; Norman Giesbrecht; Lisa Oliver; Nancy Ross Journal: J Stud Alcohol Drugs Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 2.582
Authors: Rochelle E Garner; David H Feeny; Amanda Thompson; Julie Bernier; Bentson H McFarland; Nathalie Huguet; Mark S Kaplan; Heather Orpana; Nancy A Ross; Chris Blanchard Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2011-08-13 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: David Feeny; Nathalie Huguet; Bentson H McFarland; Mark S Kaplan; Heather Orpana; Elizabeth Eckstrom Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2012-04-20 Impact factor: 6.437