Abstract
Objective: The objective of this study was to determine utility scores for various chronic conditions.
Design and setting: This study is a descriptive analysis. Health Utilities Index (HUI) scores for 20 chronic conditions were examined from the National Population Health Survey (NPHS) from 1994 to 1995.
Patients and participants: 17 626 individuals were surveyed (54.3% women). Chronic conditions included: acne (requiring medication), Alzheimer’s disease, arthritis/rheumatism, asthma, back problems excluding arthritis, chronic bronchitis or emphysema, cancer, cataracts, diabetes, epilepsy, food allergies, glaucoma, heart disease, high blood pressure, migraine headaches, other allergies, sinusitis, stroke, stomach/intestinal ulcers and urinary incontinence.
Interventions: Health Utilities Index-Mark III (HUI-Mark III) scores for patients with and without a NPHS-defined chronic condition were collected. Utility scores were examined according to age, gender and comorbidity.
Main outcome measures and results: 42.6% of individuals reported having no NPHS-defined chronic condition. The most commonly reported health conditions were allergies other than food (17.6%) and rheumatism/arthritis (16.5%). The mean HUI-Mark III scores for patients without a health state was 0.933 ± 0.079. Individuals with Alzheimer’s disease (0.580 ± 0.263), stroke (0.676 ± 0.230) and urinary incontinence (0.698 ± 0.230) had the lowest overall HUI-Mark III scores. Utility scores decreased as age and as the number of comorbid conditions increased.
Conclusions: This study provides health economists, researchers and policymakers with a reference for health utilities of various chronic conditions, different age groups, gender and comorbidities.
References
Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment (CCOHTA). Guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals: Canada. 2nd ed. Toronto (ON): Ministry of Health, 1997
Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: a review. J Health Econ 1986; 5: 1–30
Torrance GW, Furlong W, Feeny D, et al. Multi-attribute preference functions: health utilities index. Pharmacoeconomics 1995; 7(6): 503–20
Rizzo JA, Pashko S, Friedkin R, et al. Linking the health utilities index to National Medical Expenditure Survey Data. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13 (5 Pt 1): 531–41
Statistics Canada. National Population Health Survey: 1994-95. Ottawa (ON): Statistics Canada, 1995
Robinson R. Cost-utility analysis. BMJ 1993; 307: 859–62
Boyle M, Furlong W, Feeny D, et al. Reliability of the Health Utilites Index-Mark III used in the 1991 cycle 6 Canadian General Survey Health Questionnaire. Qual Life 1995; 4: 249–57
Fergusson BM, Keown PA. An introduction to utility measurement in health care. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1995; 16 (4): 240–7
Drummond M, O’Brien B, Stoddart GL, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programs. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997
Sackett DL, Torrance G. The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public. J Chronic Dis 1978; 31 (11): 697–704
Roberge R, Berthelot J, Wolfson M. The Health Utilities Index: measuring differences in Ontario by socioeconomic status. Health Rep 1995; 7 (2): 25–32
Fryback DG, Dasbach EJ, Klein R, et al. The Beaver Dam Health Outcomes Study: initial catalog of health-state quality factors. Med Decis Making 1993; 13: 89–102
Gold M, Granks P, Erickson P. Assessing the health of the nation: the predictive validity of a preference-based measure and self-rated health. Med Care 1996; 34 (2): 163–77
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mittmann, N., Trakas, K., Risebrough, N. et al. Utility Scores for Chronic Conditions in a Community-Dwelling Population. Pharmacoeconomics 15, 369–376 (1999). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199915040-00004
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199915040-00004