Patrick W Sullivan1, Julia F Slejko2, Mark J Sculpher3, Vahram Ghushchyan2. 1. Regis University, School of Pharmacy, Denver, CO (PWS) 2. University of Colorado Denver School of Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research Program, Denver, CO (JFS, VG) 3. University of York, York, United Kingdom (MJS)
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has issued guidance on cost-effectiveness analyses, suggesting that preference-based health-related quality of life (HRQL) weights or utilities be based on UK community preferences, preferably using the EQ-5D; ideally all analyses would use the same system for deriving HRQL weights, to encourage consistency and comparability across analyses. Development of a catalogue of EQ-5D scores for a range of health conditions based on UK preferences would help achieve many of these goals. OBJECTIVE: . To provide a UK-based catalogue of EQ-5D index scores. METHODS: . METHOD: s were consistent with the previously published catalogue of EQ-5D scores for the US. Community-based UK preferences were applied to EQ-5D descriptive questionnaire responses in the US-based Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). Ordinary least squares (OLS), Tobit, and censored least absolute deviations (CLAD) regression methods were used to estimate the 'marginal disutility' of each condition controlling for covariates. RESULTS: . Pooled MEPS files (2000-2003) resulted in 79,522 individuals with complete EQ-5D scores. Marginal disutilities for 135 chronic ICD-9 and 100 CCC codes are provided. Unadjusted descriptive statistics including mean, median, 25th and 75th percentiles are also reported. CONCLUSION: . This research provides community-based EQ-5D index scores for a wide variety of chronic conditions that can be used to estimate QALYs in cost-effectiveness analyses in the UK. Although using EQ-5D questionnaire responses from the US-based MEPS is less than ideal, the estimates approximate HRQL guidelines by NICE and provide an easily accessible"off-the-shelf" resource for cost-effectiveness and public-health applications.
BACKGROUND: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has issued guidance on cost-effectiveness analyses, suggesting that preference-based health-related quality of life (HRQL) weights or utilities be based on UK community preferences, preferably using the EQ-5D; ideally all analyses would use the same system for deriving HRQL weights, to encourage consistency and comparability across analyses. Development of a catalogue of EQ-5D scores for a range of health conditions based on UK preferences would help achieve many of these goals. OBJECTIVE: . To provide a UK-based catalogue of EQ-5D index scores. METHODS: . METHOD: s were consistent with the previously published catalogue of EQ-5D scores for the US. Community-based UK preferences were applied to EQ-5D descriptive questionnaire responses in the US-based Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). Ordinary least squares (OLS), Tobit, and censored least absolute deviations (CLAD) regression methods were used to estimate the 'marginal disutility' of each condition controlling for covariates. RESULTS: . Pooled MEPS files (2000-2003) resulted in 79,522 individuals with complete EQ-5D scores. Marginal disutilities for 135 chronic ICD-9 and 100 CCC codes are provided. Unadjusted descriptive statistics including mean, median, 25th and 75th percentiles are also reported. CONCLUSION: . This research provides community-based EQ-5D index scores for a wide variety of chronic conditions that can be used to estimate QALYs in cost-effectiveness analyses in the UK. Although using EQ-5D questionnaire responses from the US-based MEPS is less than ideal, the estimates approximate HRQL guidelines by NICE and provide an easily accessible"off-the-shelf" resource for cost-effectiveness and public-health applications.
Authors: Ben Kearns; Roberta Ara; Allan Wailoo; Andrea Manca; Monica Hernández Alava; Keith Abrams; Mike Campbell Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 4.981
Authors: Lisa Van Wilder; Elke Rammant; Els Clays; Brecht Devleesschauwer; Nele Pauwels; Delphine De Smedt Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2019-09-17 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Lars Oddershede; Simon Walker; Wolfgang Stöhr; David T Dunn; Alejandro Arenas-Pinto; Nicholas I Paton; Mark Sculpher Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 4.981
Authors: Marcello Lucchese; Oleg Borisenko; Lorenzo Giovanni Mantovani; Paolo Angelo Cortesi; Giancarlo Cesana; Daniel Adam; Elisabeth Burdukova; Vasily Lukyanov; Nicola Di Lorenzo Journal: Obes Facts Date: 2017-06-10 Impact factor: 3.942