Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-017-1683-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Utility values are critical for cost-utility analyses that guide healthcare decisions. We aimed to compare the utility values of the 5-level EuroQoL-5Dimension (EQ-5D-5L) health states elicited from members of the general public and patients with heart disease or cancer.
In face-to-face interviews with 157 heart disease patients, 169 cancer patients, and 169 members from the general population, participants valued 10 EQ-5D-5L health states using a composite Time Trade-Off method.
Pooling utility values for all health states, heart disease patients and cancer patients had mean utility values lower by 0.11 points (P value = 0.014) and 0.06 points (P value = 0.148), respectively, compared to the general population. Adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics, differences in health state utility values between the patient and the general populations were rendered non-significant, except that heart disease patients gave higher utility values (mean difference = 0.08; P value = 0.007) to mild health states than the general population. Difference in utility values, defined as utility value of a better health state minus that of a poorer health state, was higher among heart disease patients compared to the general population, before and after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics.
Patients may differ from members of the general population in the strength of their preferences for hypothetical health states. Using utility values derived from the general population may under-estimate the comparative effectiveness of healthcare interventions for certain diseases, such as heart diseases.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 35 kb)11136_2017_1683_MOESM1_ESM.docx
Drummond, M. F., & McGuire, A. (2001). Economic evaluation in health care: Merging theory with practice. USA: Oxford University Press.
Mulhern, B., Rowen, D., Snape, D., Jacoby, A., Marson, T., Hughes, D., et al. (2014). Valuations of epilepsy-specific health states: A comparison of patients with epilepsy and the general population. Epilepsy & Behavior, 36, 12–17. CrossRef
Deaton, C., Froelicher, E. S., Wu, L. H., Ho, C., Shishani, K., & Jaarsma, T. (2011). The global burden of cardiovascular disease. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 10, S5–S13. CrossRef
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. (2013). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Retrieved March 05, 2017, from https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg9/resources/guide-to-the-methods-of-technology-appraisal-2013-pdf-2007975843781.
Sonnenberg, F., & Beck, J. (1993). Markov models in medical decision making: A practical guide. Medical Decision Making, 4, 322–338. CrossRef
Department of Statistics Singapore. Singapore Census of Population 2010. Retrieved 02, June, 2017, from http://www.singstat.gov.sg/publications/publications-and-papers/population#census_of_population.
Rupel, V. P., & Marko, M. O. (2016). Should patients estimate health related quality of life? The results of empirical study. Value in Health, 19, A480. CrossRef
- Comparison of health state values derived from patients and individuals from the general population
Ru San Tan
Su Pin Choo
Whay Kuang Chia
Chee Keong Toh
Phong Teck Lee
Nang Khaing Zar Latt
Yin Bun Cheung
- Springer International Publishing