Benjamin M Craig1, Bryce B Reeve, David Cella, Ron D Hays, Alan S Pickard, Dennis A Revicki. 1. *Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center and University of South Florida, Tampa, FL †Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC ‡Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL §Health Services, University of California, Los Angeles and RAND, Santa Monica, CA ∥Pharmacy Practice, University of Illinois, Chicago, IL ¶Outcomes Research, Bethesda, MD.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The United States has a culturally and demographically diverse populace, and the aim of this study was to examine differences in health preferences by sex, age, ethnicity, and race. METHODS: We assessed preferences for health outcomes defined by the PROMIS-29 survey in a sample of the US population. On the basis of the survey's 540 paired-comparisons trading off lifespan and 7 domains of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), we compared the choices between men and women, adults age 18-54 years and 55 years and older, Hispanics and non-Hispanics, and non-Hispanic blacks and whites. For each subgroup, we estimated the value of 122 HRQoL outcomes on a quality-adjusted life year scale and tested for subgroup differences. RESULTS: Compared with men, women preferred reduced lifespan over losses in HRQoL, particularly for depression. Compared with the younger adults, older adults preferred reduced lifespan over the symptoms of depression, anxiety, and fatigue. Compared with non-Hispanic whites, Hispanics preferred reduced lifespan over depression and sleep disturbance, but held similar values on losses in physical functioning. Among non-Hispanics, blacks preferred reduced lifespan over losses in ability to climb stairs and to fall asleep compared with whites, but held similar values on mental health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: With the growing emphasis on patient-centeredness and culturally sensitive treatment, it is important to recognize the diversity in values placed on potential losses in HRQoL, particularly mental health outcomes. Demographic differences in preferences may influence comparative or cost effectiveness of treatments as perceived by one or another subgroup.
BACKGROUND: The United States has a culturally and demographically diverse populace, and the aim of this study was to examine differences in health preferences by sex, age, ethnicity, and race. METHODS: We assessed preferences for health outcomes defined by the PROMIS-29 survey in a sample of the US population. On the basis of the survey's 540 paired-comparisons trading off lifespan and 7 domains of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), we compared the choices between men and women, adults age 18-54 years and 55 years and older, Hispanics and non-Hispanics, and non-Hispanic blacks and whites. For each subgroup, we estimated the value of 122 HRQoL outcomes on a quality-adjusted life year scale and tested for subgroup differences. RESULTS: Compared with men, women preferred reduced lifespan over losses in HRQoL, particularly for depression. Compared with the younger adults, older adults preferred reduced lifespan over the symptoms of depression, anxiety, and fatigue. Compared with non-Hispanic whites, Hispanics preferred reduced lifespan over depression and sleep disturbance, but held similar values on losses in physical functioning. Among non-Hispanics, blacks preferred reduced lifespan over losses in ability to climb stairs and to fall asleep compared with whites, but held similar values on mental health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: With the growing emphasis on patient-centeredness and culturally sensitive treatment, it is important to recognize the diversity in values placed on potential losses in HRQoL, particularly mental health outcomes. Demographic differences in preferences may influence comparative or cost effectiveness of treatments as perceived by one or another subgroup.
Authors: Norah E Mulvaney-Day; Marcela Horvitz-Lennon; Chih-Nan Chen; Mara Laderman; Margarita Alegría Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-08-01 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Diana J Burgess; Amy A Gravely; David B Nelson; Michelle van Ryn; Matthew J Bair; Robert D Kerns; Diana M Higgins; Melissa R Partin Journal: Clin J Pain Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 3.442
Authors: Fatima Al Sayah; Nick Bansback; Stirling Bryan; Arto Ohinmaa; Lise Poissant; Eleanor Pullenayegum; Feng Xie; Jeffrey A Johnson Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-12-10 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Thomas van Gelder; Brendan Mulhern; Dounya Schoormans; Olga Husson; Richard De Abreu Lourenço Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2020-01-14 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Benjamin M Craig; Bryce B Reeve; Paul M Brown; David Cella; Ron D Hays; Joseph Lipscomb; A Simon Pickard; Dennis A Revicki Journal: Value Health Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: Alex Z Fu; Kristi D Graves; Roxanne E Jensen; John L Marshall; Margaret Formoso; Arnold L Potosky Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2015-11-18 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Trevor A Jolly; Grant R Williams; Sita Bushan; Mackenzi Pergolotti; Kirsten A Nyrop; Ellen L Jones; Hyman B Muss Journal: Womens Health (Lond) Date: 2016-01