Top

Quality of Life Research

Gepubliceerd in:

01-03-2014

Economic evaluation in short bowel syndrome (SBS): an algorithm to estimate utility scores for a patient-reported SBS-specific quality of life scale (SBS-QoL™)

Auteurs: Andrew Lloyd, Cicely Kerr, Katie Breheny, John Brazier, Aurora Ortiz, Emma Borg

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 2/2014

Abstract

Purpose

Condition-specific preference-based measures can offer utility data where they would not otherwise be available or where generic measures may lack sensitivity, although they lack comparability across conditions. This study aimed to develop an algorithm for estimating utilities from the short bowel syndrome health-related quality of life scale (SBS-QoL™).

Methods

SBS-QoL™ items were selected based on factor and item performance analysis of a European SBS-QoL™ dataset and consultation with 3 SBS clinical experts. Six-dimension health states were developed using 8 SBS-QoL™ items (2 dimensions combined 2 SBS-QoL™ items). SBS health states were valued by a UK general population sample (N = 250) using the lead-time time trade-off method. Preference weights or ‘utility decrements’ for each severity level of each dimension were estimated by regression models and used to develop the scoring algorithm.

Results

Mean utilities for the SBS health states ranged from −0.46 (worst health state, very much affected on all dimensions) to 0.92 (best health state, not at all affected on all dimensions). The random effects model with maximum likelihood estimation regression had the best predictive ability and lowest root mean squared error and mean absolute error, and was used to develop the scoring algorithm.

Conclusions

The preference-weighted scoring algorithm for the SBS-QoL™ developed is able to estimate a wide range of utility values from patient-level SBS-QoL™ data. This allows estimation of SBS HRQL impact for the purpose of economic evaluation of SBS treatment benefits.

vorige artikel The quality of life questionnaire EQ-5D-5L: psychometric properties and normative values for the general German population

volgende artikel Probabilistic mapping of the health status measure SF-12 onto the health utility measure EQ-5D using the US-population-based scoring models

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

http://www2.research.att.com/~njas/oadir/oa.16.8.2.3.d.txt.

O’Keefe, S. J. D., Buchman, A. L., Fishbein, T. M., Jeejeebhoy, K. N., Jeppesen, P. B., & Shaffer, J. (2006). Short bowel syndrome and intestinal failure: Consensus definitions and overview. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 4, 6–10.PubMedCrossRef

Buchman, A. L. (2004). The medical and surgical management of short bowel syndrome. Medscape General Medicine, 6, 12.

Nightingale, J., & Woodward, J. M. (2006). Guidelines for management of patients with a short bowel. Gut, 55, iv1–iv12.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Seetharam, P., & Rodrigues, G. (2011). Short bowel syndrome: A review of management options. Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology: Official Journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association, 17, 229.CrossRef

Carlsson, E., Bosaeus, I., & Nordgren, S. (2003). Quality of life and concerns in patients with short bowel syndrome. Clinical Nutrition, 22, 445–452.PubMedCrossRef

Winkler, M. F., Hagan, E., Wetle, T., Smith, C., Maillet, J. O., & Touger-Decker, R. (2010). An exploration of quality of life and the experience of living with home parenteral nutrition. JPEN. Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 34, 395–407.PubMedCrossRef

Carlsson, E., Berglund, B., & Nordgren, S. (2001). Living with an ostomy and short bowel syndrome: Practical aspects and impact on daily life. Journal of Wound, Ostomy, & Continence Nursing, 28, 96–105.

Baxter, J. P., Fayers, P. M., & McKinlay, A. W. (2006). A review of the quality of life of adult patients treated with long-term parenteral nutrition. Clinical Nutrition, 25, 543–553.PubMedCrossRef

Kalaitzakis, E., Carlsson, E., Josefsson, A., & Bosaeus, I. (2008). Quality of life in short-bowel syndrome: Impact of fatigue and gastrointestinal symptoms. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology, 43, 1057–1065.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Brooks, R. (1996). EuroQol: The current state of play. Health Policy, 37, 53–72.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Dolan, P. (1997). Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Medical care, 35, 1095–1108.

12.

Feeny, D., Furlong, W., Boyle, B., & Torrance, G. W. (1995). Multi-attribute health status classification systems: Health Utilities Index. Pharmacoeconomics, 7, 490–502.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Papaionnou, D., Brazier, J., & Parry, G. (2011). How valid and responsive are generic health status measures, such as the EQ-5D and SF-36, in schizophrenia? A systematic review. Value in Health, 14, 907–920.CrossRef

14.

Tosh, J., Brazier, J., Evans, P., & Longworth, L. (2012). A review of generic preference-based measures of health-related quality of life in visual disorders. Value in Health, 15, 118–127.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

15.

FDA. (2009). Guidance for industry patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf.

16.

Lin, F., Longworth, L., & Pickard, S. (2012). Evaluation of content on EQ-5D as compared to disease-specific utility measures. Quality of Life Research, 22, 853–874.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Versteegh, M. M., Leunis, A., Uyl-de Groot, C. A., & Stolk, E. A. (2012). Condition-specific preference-based measures: Benefit or burden? Value in Health, 15(3), 504–513.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Marra, C. A., Woolcott, J. C., Kopec, J. A., Shojania, K., Offer, R., Brazier, J. E., et al. (2005). A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis. Social Science and Medicine, 60(7), 1571–1582.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Brazier, J., Rowen, D., Mavranezouli, I., Tsuchiya, A., Young, T., & Yang, Y. (2012). Developing and testing methods for deriving preference-based measures of health from condition specific measures (and other patient based measures of outcome). Health Technology Assessment, 16, 1–114.

20.

Yang, Y., Brazier, J. E., Tsuchiya, A., & Coyne, K. (2009). Estimating a preference-based index from the Over Active Bladder questionnaire. Value in Health, 12, 159–166.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Berghoefer, P., Fragkos, K., Baxter, J. P., Forbes, A., Joly, F., Heinze, H. et al. (2012). Development and validation of the disease-specific Short Bowel Syndrome-Quality of Life (SBS-QoL™) scale. Clinical Nutrition (in press).

22.

Jeppesen, P. B., Gilroy, R., Pertkiewicz, M., Allard, J. P., Messing, B., & O’Keefe, S. J. (2011). Randomised placebo-controlled trial of teduglutide in reducing parenteral nutrition and/or intravenous fluid requirements in patients with short bowel syndrome. Gut, 60(7), 902–914.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

23.

Brazier, J., Czoski-Murray, C., Roberts, J., Brown, M., Symonds, T., & Kelleher, C. (2008). Estimation of a preference-based index from a condition-specific measure: The King’s Health Questionnaire. Medical Decision Making, 28, 113–126.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Kind, P., & Macran, S. (2005). Eliciting social preference weights for functional assessment of cancer therapy-lung health states. Pharmacoeconomics, 23, 1143–1153.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Brazier, J., Roberts, J., & Deverill, M. (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of health economics, 21, 271–292.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Kind, P. (1996). The EuroQoL instrument: An index of health-related quality of life. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials, 2, 191–201.

27.

Rowen, D., Brazier, J. E., Young, T. A., Gaugrist, S., Craig, B. M., King, M. T., et al. (2010). Deriving a preference-based measure for cancer using the EORTC QLQ-C30. Value in Health, 14, 721–731.CrossRef

28.

Yang, Y., Brazier, J. E., Tsuchiya, A., & Young, T. A. (2011). Estimating a preference-based index for a 5-dimensional health state classification for asthma derived from the asthma quality of life questionnaire. Medical Decision Making, 31, 281–291.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Berghoefer, P., Mittelstadt, S., & Vogt-Humberg, I. (2010). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with SBS. Internal Report by Peirrel Research Germany GmbH (former IFE Germany GmbH) for Nycomed GmbH.

30.

Boyd, N. F., Sutherland, H. J., Heasman, K. Z., Tritchler, D. L., & Cummings, B. J. (1990). Whose utilities for decision analysis? Medical Decision Making, 10, 58–67.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Shiroiwa, T., Fukuda, T., & Tsutani, K. (2009). Health utility scores of colorectal cancer based on societal preference in Japan. Quality of Life Research, 18, 1095–1103.PubMedCrossRef

32.

Ubel, P. A., Loewenstein, G., & Jepson, C. (2003). Whose quality of life? A commentary exploring discrepancies between health state evaluations of patients and the general public. Quality of Life Research, 12, 599–607.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Devlin, N. J., Buckingham, K., Shah, K., Tsuchiya, A., Tilling, C., Wilkinson, G. et al. (2011). A comparison of alternative variants of the lead and lag time TTO. Health Economics, 22(5), 517–532.

34.

Devlin, N. J., Tsuchiya, A., Buckingham, K., & Tilling, C. (2011). A uniform time trade off method for states better and worse than dead: Feasibility study of the ‘lead time’ approach. Health Economics, 20, 248–361.CrossRef

35.

Kind, P., Dolan, P., Gudex, C., & Williams, A. (1998). Variations in population health status: Results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. BMJ, 316, 736–741.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Titel: Economic evaluation in short bowel syndrome (SBS): an algorithm to estimate utility scores for a patient-reported SBS-specific quality of life scale (SBS-QoL™)
Auteurs: Andrew Lloyd
Cicely Kerr
Katie Breheny
John Brazier
Aurora Ortiz
Emma Borg
Publicatiedatum: 01-03-2014
Uitgeverij: Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 2/2014
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0516-4

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2/2014

How do clinical and psychological variables relate to quality of life in end-stage renal disease? Validating a proximal–distal model

Metacognition: towards a new approach to quality of life

Associations of cancer and other chronic medical conditions with SF-6D preference-based scores in Medicare beneficiaries

EQ-5D Portuguese population norms

How to measure quality of life in shared-housing arrangements? A comparison of dementia-specific instruments

Determinants of quality of life in Spanish transsexuals attending a gender unit before genital sex reassignment surgery