Literature DB >> 24756482

Does diabetes have an impact on health-state utility? a study of Asians in Singapore.

P Wang1, E S Tai, J Thumboo, Hubertus J M Vrijhoef, Nan Luo.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to compare the time trade-off (TTO) values of EQ-5D-3L health states elicited from Singaporeans with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and T2DM patients with and without complications.
METHODS: The TTO values of ten EQ-5D-3L health states were elicited from a consecutive sample of T2DM patients and a general Singaporean population sample using similar valuation protocols. In face-to-face interviews, T2DM patients and members of the general population were asked to value five and ten health states, respectively. The difference in TTO values between the two samples and between T2DM patients with and without complications was examined using multiple linear regression models.
RESULTS: A total of 109 T2DM patients and 46 individuals without T2DM provided data. All ten health states considered, the mean TTO value was -0.02 for the general population sample and -0.04 for T2DM patients, with the unadjusted and adjusted difference being -0.06 (95 % confidence interval [CI] -0.16, 0.03) and 0.02 (95 % CI -0.12, 0.15). The general population sample had systematically lower TTO values for mild health states, with the adjusted difference being -0.13 (95 % CI -0.25, -0.02); while the two samples had similar TTO values for severe health states, with the adjusted difference being 0.02 (95 % CI -0.16, 0.19). T2DM patients without complications had systematically lower TTO values than those with complications, with the adjusted difference being -0.10 (95 % CI -0.23, 0.03).
CONCLUSIONS: It appears that diabetes and its complications affect patients' valuation of health states. Hence, the EQ-5D-3L health-state values based on the general population may underestimate the utility of health interventions for T2DM.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24756482     DOI: 10.1007/s40271-014-0059-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient        ISSN: 1178-1653            Impact factor:   3.883


  35 in total

Review 1.  Valuing health-related quality of life. Issues and controversies.

Authors:  P Dolan
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  The influence of ill-health experience on the valuation of health.

Authors:  X Badia; M Herdman; P Kind
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Valuing health states: a comparison of methods.

Authors:  P Dolan; C Gudex; P Kind; A Williams
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Major symptom score utility index for patients with acute rhinosinusitis.

Authors:  Dennis A Revicki; Mary Kay Margolis; Christine L Thompson; Eli O Meltzer; David W Sandor; James W Shaw
Journal:  Am J Rhinol Allergy       Date:  2011 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.467

5.  Focusing illusion, adaptation and EQ-5D health state descriptions: the difference between patients and public.

Authors:  Yvette Peeters; Thea P M Vliet Vlieland; Anne M Stiggelbout
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-03-03       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Whose preferences count?

Authors:  P Dolan
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1999 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Weights for scoring the quality of well-being instrument among rheumatoid arthritics. A comparison to general population weights.

Authors:  D J Balaban; P C Sagi; N I Goldfarb; S Nettler
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1986-11       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Health state valuations of patients and the general public analytically compared: a meta-analytical comparison of patient and population health state utilities.

Authors:  Yvette Peeters; Anne M Stiggelbout
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2009-09-10       Impact factor: 5.725

9.  Are patients' judgments of health status really different from the general population?

Authors:  Paul Fm Krabbe; Noor Tromp; Theo Jm Ruers; Piet Lcm van Riel
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2011-05-11       Impact factor: 3.186

10.  Time trade-off: one methodology, different methods.

Authors:  Arthur E Attema; Yvette Edelaar-Peeters; Matthijs M Versteegh; Elly A Stolk
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2013-07
View more
  3 in total

1.  Comparison of health state values derived from patients and individuals from the general population.

Authors:  Mihir Gandhi; Ru San Tan; Raymond Ng; Su Pin Choo; Whay Kuang Chia; Chee Keong Toh; Carolyn Lam; Phong Teck Lee; Nang Khaing Zar Latt; Kim Rand-Hendriksen; Yin Bun Cheung; Nan Luo
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Do chronic disease patients value generic health states differently from individuals with no chronic disease? A case of a multicultural Asian population.

Authors:  Mihir Gandhi; Julian Thumboo; Nan Luo; Hwee-Lin Wee; Yin-Bun Cheung
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2015-01-23       Impact factor: 3.186

3.  Culture and age influences upon gambling and problem gambling.

Authors:  Mythily Subramaniam; Edimansyah Abdin; Shazana Shahwan; Janhavi Ajit Vaingankar; Louisa Picco; Colette Joy Browning; Shane Andrew Thomas; Siow Ann Chong
Journal:  Addict Behav Rep       Date:  2015-04-25
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.