Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 12/2017

14-08-2017

Comparison of health state values derived from patients and individuals from the general population

Auteurs: Mihir Gandhi, Ru San Tan, Raymond Ng, Su Pin Choo, Whay Kuang Chia, Chee Keong Toh, Carolyn Lam, Phong Teck Lee, Nang Khaing Zar Latt, Kim Rand-Hendriksen, Yin Bun Cheung, Nan Luo

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 12/2017

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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.

Conclusions

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.
vorige artikel Differences in quality of life between Jewish and Arab patients on hemodialysis
volgende artikel Sample size determination for EQ-5D-5L value set studies
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
Brazier, J. E., Dixon, S., & Ratcliffe, J. (2009). The role of patient preferences in cost-effectiveness analysis. Pharmacoeconomics, 27(9), 705–712.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Stamuli, E. (2011). Health outcomes in economic evaluation: Who should value health? British Medical Bulletin, 97, 197–210.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Stiggelbout, A. M., & Vogel-Voogt, D. (2008). Health state utilities: A framework for studying the gap between the imagined and the real. Value in Health, 11(1), 76–87.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Drummond, M. F., & McGuire, A. (2001). Economic evaluation in health care: Merging theory with practice. USA: Oxford University Press.
5.
Gandjour, A. (2010). Theoretical foundation of patient v. Population preferences in calculating QALYs. Medical Decision Making, 30(4), E57–E63.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Wang, P., Tai, E., Thumboo, J., Vrijhoef, H. J., & Luo, N. (2014). Does diabetes have an impact on health-state utility? A study of asians in singapore. The Patient, 7(3), 329–337.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Rowen, D., Mulhern, B., Banerjee, S., Tait, R., Watchurst, C., Smith, S. C., et al. (2014). Comparison of general population, patient, and carer utility values for dementia health States. Medical Decision Making, 35(1), 68–80.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Peeters, Y., & Stiggelbout, A. M. (2010). Health state valuations of patients and the general public analytically compared: A meta-analytical comparison of patient and population health state utilities. Value in Health, 13(2), 306–309.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Gandhi, M., Thumboo, J., Luo, N., Wee, H. L., & Cheung, Y. B. (2015). Do chronic disease patients value generic health states differently from individuals with no chronic disease? A case of a multicultural Asian population. Health and quality of life outcomes, 13, 8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Gerhards, S. A., Evers, S. M., Sabel, P. W., & Huibers, M. J. (2011). Discrepancy in rating health-related quality of life of depression between patient and general population. Quality of Life Research, 20(2), 273–279.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Dolders, M. G., Zeegers, M. P., Groot, W., & Ament, A. (2006). A meta-analysis demonstrates no significant differences between patient and population preferences. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(7), 653–664.CrossRefPubMed
12.
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
13.
Pickard, A. S., Tawk, R., & Shaw, J. W. (2013). The effect of chronic conditions on stated preferences for health. The European Journal of Health Economics, 14(4), 697–702.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Krabbe, P. F., Tromp, N., Ruers, T. J., & Reil, P. L. (2011). Are patients’ judgments of health status really different from the general population? Health and quality of life outcomes, 9, 31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., Janssen, M., Kind, P., Parkin, D., et al. (2011). Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Quality of Life Research, 20(10), 1727–1736.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Pickard, A. S., De Leon, M. C., Kohlmann, T., Cella, D., & Rosenbloom, S. (2007). Psychometric comparison of the standard EQ-5D to a 5 level version in cancer patients. Medical Care, 45(3), 259–263.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Janssen, M., Pickard, A. S., Golicki, D., Gudex, C., Niewada, M., Scalone, L., et al. (2013). Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: A multi-country study. Quality of Life Research, 22(7), 1717–1727.CrossRefPubMed
18.
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
19.
Fitzmaurice, C., Dicker, D., Pain, A., Hamavid, H., Moradi-Lakeh, M., Maclntyre, M. F., et al. (2015). The global burden of cancer 2013. JAMA oncology, 1(4), 505–527.CrossRefPubMed
20.
21.
Luo, N., Li, M., Stolk, E. A., & Devlin, N. J. (2013). The effects of lead time and visual aids in TTO valuation: A study of the EQ-VT framework. The European Journal of Health Economics, 14(Suppl 1), S15–S24.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Oppe, M., Rand-Hendriksen, K., Shah, K., Ramos-Goni, J. M., & Luo, N. (2016). EuroQol protocols for time trade-off valuation of health outcomes. PharmacoEconomics, 34(10), 993–1004.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Oppe, M., Devlin, N. J., van Hout, B., Krabbe, P. F., & de Charro, F. (2014). A program of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value in Health, 17(4), 445–453.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Sonnenberg, F., & Beck, J. (1993). Markov models in medical decision making: A practical guide. Medical Decision Making, 4, 322–338.CrossRef
25.
Williams, R. L. (2000). A note on robust variance estimation for cluster-correlated data. Biometrics, 56(2), 645–646.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Nolan, C. M., Longworth, L., Lord, J., Canavan, J. L., Jones, S. E., Kon, S. S., et al. (2016). The EQ-5D-5L health status questionnaire in COPD: Validity, responsiveness and minimum important difference. Thorax, 71(6), 493–500.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
28.
Mann, R., Brazier, J., & Tsuchiya, A. (2009). A comparison of patient and general population weightings of EQ-5D dimensions. Health Economics, 18(3), 363–372.CrossRefPubMed
29.
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
30.
Papageorgiou, K., Vermeulen, K., Schroevers, M., Stiggelbout, A., Buskens, E., Krabbe, P., et al. (2015). Do individuals with and without depression value depression differently? And if so, why? Quality of Life Research, 24(11), 2565–2575.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Sayah, F., Bansback, N., Bryan, S., Ohinmaa, A., Poissant, L., Pullenayegum, E., et al. (2016). Determinants of time trade-off valuations for EQ-5D-5L health states: Data from the Canadian EQ-5D-5L valuation study. Quality of Life Research, 25(7), 1679–1685.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Shaw, J., Johnson, J., Chen, S., Levin, J., & Coons, S. (2007). Racial/ethnic differences in preferences for the EQ-5D health states: Results from the U.S. valuation study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(6), 479–490.CrossRefPubMed
Metagegevens
Titel
Comparison of health state values derived from patients and individuals from the general population
Auteurs
Mihir Gandhi
Ru San Tan
Raymond Ng
Su Pin Choo
Whay Kuang Chia
Chee Keong Toh
Carolyn Lam
Phong Teck Lee
Nang Khaing Zar Latt
Kim Rand-Hendriksen
Yin Bun Cheung
Nan Luo
Publicatiedatum
14-08-2017
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 12/2017
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1683-5

Andere artikelen Uitgave 12/2017

Quality of Life Research 12/2017 Naar de uitgave

OriginalPaper

Subjective evaluation of psychosocial well-being in children and youths with overweight or obesity: the impact of multidisciplinary obesity treatment

OriginalPaper

Sample size determination for EQ-5D-5L value set studies

OriginalPaper

Maternal mental quality of life mediates the associations between intimate partner abuse against mothers and their children’s behaviours and quality of life in low-income Chinese families

OriginalPaper

Health-related quality of life in Spanish informal caregivers: gender differences and support received

OriginalPaper

Internal resources among informal caregivers: trajectories and associations with well-being

OriginalPaper

A study of dyadic interdependence of control, social participation and occupation of adults who use long-term care services and their carers