Literature DB >> 9551782

Quality of life in epilepsy: comparison of four preference measures.

K Stavem1.   

Abstract

Several specific and general measures are available for the assessment of overall health related quality of life in epilepsy. Few of the commonly used measures provide utility weights for use in cost-utility analyses. This study compares four methods for measuring utility weights: time trade-off (TTO), standard gamble (SG), 15D, end the EuroQol visual analog scale. All patients aged 18-67 years with a diagnosis of epilepsy, who had been admitted to or attended the outpatient clinic at a large county hospital 1987-1994, received a comprehensive questionnaire. From 397 respondents, 82 patients were randomly selected. Most of the 57 patients completing the study generally had well-controlled epilepsy, but were still on anti-epileptic medication. Mean age was 44 years. Fourty-one percent were male and 59% female. The resulting utility weights differed considerably between the measures, both with regard to central tendency and dispersion. Median utility scores: EuroQol visual analog scale 0.75, 15D 0.90, TTO 0.98, SG 0.99. There was a good association between the EuroQol rating scale and the 15D, and a moderate association between SG and TTO. These preference instruments measure different aspects of health-related quality of life and thus yield different results. Caution should be taken when interpreting cost-utility studies, as results will depend on the choice of utility instrument.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9551782     DOI: 10.1016/s0920-1211(97)00075-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Epilepsy Res        ISSN: 0920-1211            Impact factor:   3.045


  13 in total

1.  Reliability, validity and responsiveness of two multiattribute utility measures in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Authors:  K Stavem
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  A Norwegian 15D value algorithm: proposing a new procedure to estimate 15D value algorithms.

Authors:  Yvonne Anne Michel; Liv Ariane Augestad; Mathias Barra; Kim Rand
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2018-11-30       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Comparison of preference-based utilities of the 15D, EQ-5D and SF-6D in patients with HIV/AIDS.

Authors:  Knut Stavem; Stig S Frøland; Kjell B Hellum
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  QALYs: are they helpful to decision makers?

Authors:  Maurice McGregor; J Jaime Caro
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Responsiveness of generic health-related quality of life measures in stroke.

Authors:  A Simon Pickard; Jeffrey A Johnson; David H Feeny
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Utilities and disutilities for attributes of injectable treatments for type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Kristina S Boye; Louis S Matza; Kimberly N Walter; Kate Van Brunt; Andrew C Palsgrove; Aodan Tynan
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2010-03-12

7.  Measuring preferences for schizophrenia outcomes with the time tradeoff method.

Authors:  Martha Shumway; Tandy L Chouljian; Cynthia L Battle
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2005 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 1.505

8.  Utilities and disutilities for type 2 diabetes treatment-related attributes.

Authors:  Louis S Matza; Kristina S Boye; Nicole Yurgin; Jessica Brewster-Jordan; Sally Mannix; Jodi M Shorr; Beth L Barber
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-07-19       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Overcoming inherent problems of preference-based techniques for measuring health benefits: an empirical study in the context of kidney transplantation.

Authors:  Nick Kontodimopoulos; Dimitris Niakas
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2006-01-14       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Psychometric properties and validation of Persian version of quality of life in epilepsy inventory (QOLIE-89).

Authors:  Amrollah Ebrahimi; Majid Barekatain; Alireza Bornamanesh; Mohammad Reza Najafi; Maryam Salehzadeh; Mohammad Reza Maracy
Journal:  J Res Med Sci       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 1.852

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.