Literature DB >> 33736649

Health state utility values in major depressive disorder treated with pharmacological interventions: a systematic literature review.

James Brockbank1, Taryn Krause2, Emily Moss3, Anne Milthers Pedersen4, Michael Frank Mørup4, Outi Ahdesmäki3, Jake Vaughan3, Thor-Henrik Brodtkorb5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is associated with decreased patient well-being and symptoms that can cause substantial impairments in patient functioning and even lead to suicide. Worldwide, MDD currently causes the second-most years lived with disability and is predicted to become the leading cause of disability by 2030. Utility values, capturing patient quality of life, are required in economic evaluations for new treatments undergoing reimbursement submissions. We aimed to identify health state utility values (HSUVs) and disutilities in MDD for use in future economic evaluations of pharmacological treatments.
METHODS: Embase, PubMed, Econlit, and Cochrane databases, plus gray literature, were searched from January 1998 to December 21, 2018, with no language or geographical restrictions, for relevant studies that reported HSUVs and disutilities for patients with MDD receiving pharmacological interventions.
RESULTS: 443 studies were identified; 79 met the inclusion criteria. We focused on a subgroup of 28 articles that reported primary utility data from 16 unique studies of MDD treated with pharmacological interventions. HSUVs were elicited using EQ-5D (13/16, 81%; EQ-5D-3L: 11/16, 69%; EQ-5D-3L or EQ-5D-5L not specified: 2/16), EQ-VAS (5/16, 31%), and standard gamble (1/16, 6%). Most studies reported baseline HSUVs defined by study entry criteria. HSUVs for a first or recurrent major depressive episode (MDE) ranged from 0.33 to 0.544 and expanded from 0.2 to 0.61 for patients with and without painful physical symptoms, respectively. HSUVs for an MDE with inadequate treatment response ranged from 0.337 to 0.449. Three studies reported HSUVs defined by MADRS or HAMD-17 clinical thresholds. There was a large amount of heterogeneity in patient characteristics between the studies. One study reported disutility estimates associated with treatment side effects.
CONCLUSIONS: Published HSUVs in MDD, elicited using methods accepted by health technology assessment bodies, are available for future economic evaluations. However, the evidence base is limited, and it is important to select appropriate HSUVs for the intervention being evaluated and that align with clinical health state definitions used within an economic model. Future studies are recommended to elicit HSUVs for new treatments and their side effects and add to the existing evidence where data are lacking.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Disutilities; Health state utility values; Major depressive disorder; Systematic review

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33736649      PMCID: PMC7977292          DOI: 10.1186/s12955-021-01723-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes        ISSN: 1477-7525            Impact factor:   3.186


  34 in total

1.  Systematic searching and selection of health state utility values from the literature.

Authors:  Diana Papaioannou; John Brazier; Suzy Paisley
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 5.725

2.  Association between painful physical symptoms and clinical outcomes in Chinese patients with major depressive disorder: a three-month observational study.

Authors:  Hui-chun Li; Ming-yuan Zhang; Gang Wang; Hong-geng Zhang; Hong-yan Zhang; Ying Liu; Ming Li; Cong-pei Zhang; Ji-sheng Tang; Wen-yuan Wu; Pritibha Singh; Renee Elizabeth Granger; Joel Raskin; Qiu-qing Ang
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 2.628

3.  Clinical effectiveness of individual cognitive behavioral therapy for depressed older people in primary care: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Marc Antony Serfaty; Deborah Haworth; Martin Blanchard; Marta Buszewicz; Shahed Murad; Michael King
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  2009-12

4.  Chinese patients with major depression: Do concomitant pain symptoms affect quality of life independently of severity of depression?

Authors:  Diego Novick; William Montgomery; Maria Victoria Moneta; Xiaomei Peng; Roberto Brugnoli; Josep Maria Haro
Journal:  Int J Psychiatry Clin Pract       Date:  2015-05-07       Impact factor: 1.812

5.  Evaluation of the cost effectiveness of escitalopram versus venlafaxine XR in major depressive disorder.

Authors:  José-Luis Fernandez; Stuart Montgomery; Clément Francois
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Association between painful physical symptoms and clinical outcomes in East Asian patients with major depressive disorder: a 3-month prospective observational study.

Authors:  Q Q Ang; Y K Wing; Y He; A H Sulaiman; N-Y Chiu; Y-C Shen; G Wang; C Zhang; K-H Lee; P Singh; R E Granger; J Raskin; M Dossenbach
Journal:  Int J Clin Pract       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.503

7.  Factors influencing depression endpoints research (FINDER): study design and population characteristics.

Authors:  Ana Garcia-Cebrian; Michael Bauer; Angel L Montejo; Nicolas Dantchev; Koen Demyttenaere; Paul Gandhi; Luigi Grassi; Brigitta U Monz; David G S Perahia; Deborah Quail; Andre Tylee
Journal:  Eur Psychiatry       Date:  2007-12-20       Impact factor: 5.361

8.  An observational study of duloxetine versus SSRI monotherapy in Japanese patients with major depressive disorder: subgroup analyses of treatment effectiveness for pain, depressive symptoms, and quality of life.

Authors:  Atsushi Kuga; Toshinaga Tsuji; Shinji Hayashi; Shinji Fujikoshi; Hirofumi Tokuoka; Aki Yoshikawa; Rodrigo Escobar; Kazuhide Tanaka; Takaharu Azekawa
Journal:  Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 2.570

9.  Efficacy and tolerability of vortioxetine versus agomelatine, categorized by previous treatment, in patients with major depressive disorder switched after an inadequate response.

Authors:  George I Papakostas; Rebecca Z Nielsen; Marianne Dragheim; Brigitte Tonnoir
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2018-02-22       Impact factor: 4.791

10.  Usefulness of EQ-5D in assessing health status in primary care patients with major depressive disorder.

Authors:  Christophe Sapin; Bruno Fantino; Marie-Laure Nowicki; Paul Kind
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2004-05-05       Impact factor: 3.186

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Time trade-off health state utility values for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Péter György Balázs; Dalma Erdősi; Antal Zemplényi; Valentin Brodszky
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 3.440

2.  An assessment of sensory sensitivity in women suffering from depression using transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation.

Authors:  Joanna Witkoś; Agnieszka Fusińska-Korpik; Magdalena Hartman-Petrycka; Agnieszka Nowak
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2022-05-09       Impact factor: 3.061

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.