Literature DB >> 9327617

Technology assessment using the association between outcome measures and patterns of illness severity.

R T Almeida1, H Hjortswang, M Ström, S Almer, J Persson.   

Abstract

The inclusion of a patient's illness experience as outcome in the assessment of health care technology has revealed methodological limitations such as the interpretation of multi-attribute scores and lack of knowledge about the association between illness and disease information. In an attempt to overcome these limitations, a cross-sectional study is performed to search for patterns of illness severity and investigate the association between illness measures and between illness patterns and disease factors. A sample of 211 patients with ulcerative colitis is studied using the sickness impact profile (SIP) and the rating form for inflammatory bowel disease patient concerns (RFIPC) as illness measures. SIP and RFIPC scores show low association, suggesting that they provide complementary information about the patient's illness status. Cluster analysis is performed using the two measures of illness separately to identify groups of patients with different degrees of severity of illness (clusters). The cluster description covers illness, disease and social and demographic variables. The RFIPC clusters show a general pattern of ascendant rank scores for the RFIPC items. SIP clusters differ, not only in the level of severity, but also in specific types of disability. The patients in the clusters with the highest degree of disability (reflected by SIP) show a non-linear relationship with patients' concerns (reflected by RFIPC) and disease factors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9327617     DOI: 10.1007/bf02534095

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput        ISSN: 0140-0118            Impact factor:   2.602


  10 in total

Review 1.  Severity of a case for outcome assessment in health care--definitions and classification of instruments.

Authors:  R T Almeida; P Carlsson
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 2.980

2.  Economic analysis alongside clinical trials. Revisiting the methodological issues.

Authors:  M F Drummond; L Davies
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 2.188

3.  Quality of life bibliography and indexes: 1994 update.

Authors:  R A Berzon; M A Donnelly; R L Simpson; G P Simeon; H H Tilson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 4.  Using cluster analysis for medical resource decision making.

Authors:  D Dilts; J Khamalah; A Plotkin
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1995 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Linking clinical variables with health-related quality of life. A conceptual model of patient outcomes.

Authors:  I B Wilson; P D Cleary
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-01-04       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measure.

Authors:  M Bergner; R A Bobbitt; W B Carter; B S Gilson
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1981-08       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate?

Authors:  C A McHorney; A R Tarlov
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  The rating form of IBD patient concerns: a new measure of health status.

Authors:  D A Drossman; J Leserman; Z M Li; C M Mitchell; E A Zagami; D L Patrick
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  1991 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.312

9.  Measuring health in rheumatic disorders by means of a Swedish version of the sickness impact profile. Results from a population study.

Authors:  M Sullivan; M Ahlmén; B Archenholtz; G Svensson
Journal:  Scand J Rheumatol       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 3.641

10.  Quality of Life in inflammatory bowel disease: biases and other factors affecting scores.

Authors:  E J Irvine
Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl       Date:  1995
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.