Elizabeth Goodwin1, Colin Green2, Anne Spencer3. 1. Health Economics Group, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK. Electronic address: e.goodwin@exeter.ac.uk. 2. Health Economics Group, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK; UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care of the South West Peninsula (PenCLAHRC), University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK. 3. Health Economics Group, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Condition-specific measures are frequently used to assess the health-related quality of life of people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Such measures are unsuitable for use in economic evaluations that require estimates of cost per quality-adjusted life-year because they are not based on preferences. OBJECTIVES: To report the estimation of a preference-based single index for an eight-dimensional instrument for MS, the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale - Eight Dimensions (MSIS-8D), derived from an MS-specific measure of health-related quality of life, the 29-item Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29). METHODS: We elicited preferences for a sample of MSIS-8D states (n = 169) from a sample (n = 1702) of the UK general population. Preferences were elicited using the time trade-off technique via an Internet-based survey. We fitted regression models to these data to estimate values for all health states described by the MSIS-8D. Estimated values were assessed against MSIS-29 scores and values derived from generic preference-based measures in a large, representative sample of people with MS. RESULTS: Participants reported that the time trade-off questions were easy to understand. Observed health state values ranged from 0.08 to 0.89. The best-performing model was a main effects, random effects model (mean absolute error = 0.04). Validation analyses support the performance of the MSIS-8D index: it correlated more strongly than did generic measures with MSIS-29 scores, and it discriminated effectively between subgroups of people with MS. CONCLUSIONS: The MSIS-8D enables health state values to be estimated from the MSIS-29, adding to the methods available to assess health outcomes and to estimate quality-adjusted life-years for MS for use in health technology assessment and decision-making contexts.
BACKGROUND: Condition-specific measures are frequently used to assess the health-related quality of life of people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Such measures are unsuitable for use in economic evaluations that require estimates of cost per quality-adjusted life-year because they are not based on preferences. OBJECTIVES: To report the estimation of a preference-based single index for an eight-dimensional instrument for MS, the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale - Eight Dimensions (MSIS-8D), derived from an MS-specific measure of health-related quality of life, the 29-item Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29). METHODS: We elicited preferences for a sample of MSIS-8D states (n = 169) from a sample (n = 1702) of the UK general population. Preferences were elicited using the time trade-off technique via an Internet-based survey. We fitted regression models to these data to estimate values for all health states described by the MSIS-8D. Estimated values were assessed against MSIS-29 scores and values derived from generic preference-based measures in a large, representative sample of people with MS. RESULTS:Participants reported that the time trade-off questions were easy to understand. Observed health state values ranged from 0.08 to 0.89. The best-performing model was a main effects, random effects model (mean absolute error = 0.04). Validation analyses support the performance of the MSIS-8D index: it correlated more strongly than did generic measures with MSIS-29 scores, and it discriminated effectively between subgroups of people with MS. CONCLUSIONS: The MSIS-8D enables health state values to be estimated from the MSIS-29, adding to the methods available to assess health outcomes and to estimate quality-adjusted life-years for MS for use in health technology assessment and decision-making contexts.
Authors: Nadina B Lincoln; Lucy E Bradshaw; Cris S Constantinescu; Florence Day; Avril Er Drummond; Deborah Fitzsimmons; Shaun Harris; Alan A Montgomery; Roshan das Nair Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: K Thiran Jayasundera; Rebhi O Abuzaitoun; Gabrielle D Lacy; Maria Fernanda Abalem; Gregory M Saltzman; Thomas A Ciulla; Mark W Johnson Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2021-08-22 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Anthony Feinstein; Maria Pia Amato; Giampaolo Brichetto; Jeremy Chataway; Nancy Chiaravalloti; Ulrik Dalgas; John DeLuca; Peter Feys; Massimo Filippi; Jennifer Freeman; Cecilia Meza; Matilde Inglese; Robert W Motl; Maria Assunta Rocca; Brian M Sandroff; Amber Salter; Gary Cutter Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2020-05-22 Impact factor: 2.474
Authors: Nima Golijani-Moghaddam; David L Dawson; Nikos Evangelou; James Turton; Annie Hawton; Graham R Law; Bryan Roche; Elise Rowan; Rupert Burge; Alexandra C Frost; Roshan das Nair Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud Date: 2022-09-03
Authors: J A Freeman; W Hendrie; S Creanor; L Jarrett; A Barton; C Green; J Marsden; E Rogers; J Zajicek Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2016-05-05 Impact factor: 2.474
Authors: J Marsden; M Pavlou; R Dennett; A Gibbon; R Knight-Lozano; L Jeu; C Flavell; J Freeman; D E Bamiou; C Harris; A Hawton; E Goodwin; B Jones; S Creanor Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2020-11-27 Impact factor: 2.474
Authors: Annie Hawton; Elizabeth Goodwin; Kate Boddy; Jennifer Freeman; Sarah Thomas; Jeremy Chataway; Colin Green Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2020-09-03 Impact factor: 6.312