Abstract
Background: Utility, a concept derived from economics, is the desirability or preference that individuals exhibit for a certain health state. Utility measurement could be viewed as an alternative means of appraising the quality of life of individuals affected by a chronic illness such as schizophrenia. Traditional techniques of utility measurement involve 2 steps: (i) identifying the different health states experienced by individuals during the course of an illness; and (ii) assigning them numerical values known as utilities.
Aim: The study examined the feasibility issues and psychometric aspects of obtaining accurate health state descriptions and their utilities from symptomatically stable patients with schizophrenia.
Methods: The study used a cross-sectional, case-controlled design, with a study group consisting of 120 clinically stabilised patients with schizophrenia and a control group of 32 treated and recovered patients with major depression. Patients were asked to provide detailed descriptions of 3 distinct health states associated with their illness: current state, worst state experienced since the onset of illness and a perfect state desired in the future. Further, patients were asked to assign utilities to these health states with the aid of a purpose-built evaluation protocol comprising Magnitude Estimation (ME), Rating Scale (RS), Standard Gamble (SG), Time Trade-Off (TTO) and Willingness-to-Pay (WTP) techniques. The battery was repeated after a 1-week interval. Independent raters assessed symptom severity, insight and quality of life, and nurse-clinicians involved in their care were asked to provide the utility ratings of their clients’ mental health state. Patients’ opinions about the acceptability of utility measurement techniques, and the respondent burden were also ascertained.
Results: Compared with control patients with treated depression, patients with schizophrenia were able to distinguish and describe the specified health states with an equal degree of ease and accuracy.RS, TTO and WTP techniques emerged as the favoured methods of utility evaluation. The test-retest reliability of utility ratings (r = 0.87 to 0.97; p < 0.001) was high, and concurrent validity with the quality of life measures was acceptable. Reliability and validity of patients’ appraisals were unaffected by symptoms severity and insight. The accuracy of nurse-clinicians’ appraisals were dependent on their close familiarity with the patients and their illness.
Conclusion: Clinically stabilised patients with schizophrenia can provide accurate health state descriptions and assign them utilities with a fair degree of reliability and validity. Utility evaluations based on patients’ self-appraisals can be seen as potential tools in outcome studies and clinical trials involving patients with schizophrenia, but the methodology requires further refinement to accommodate the limitations imposed by the patients’ disturbed mental status.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
World Health Organization. Schizophrenia: an international follow-up study. Chichester: World Health Organisation, 1979
Ottawa-Carleton Friends of Schizophrenics. Schizophrenic psychosis in Canada. Ottawa (ON): Ottawa-Carleton Chapter of Ontario Friends of Schizophrenia, 1991
Davies LM, Drummond MF. The economic burden of schizophrenia. Psychiatr Bull 1990; 14: 522–5
Awad AG, Voruganti LNP, Heslegrave RJ. The aims of antipsychotic medications: what are they and are they being achieved? CNS Drugs 1995; 4: 8–16
Awad AG. Quality of life in medicated schizophrenics: therapeutic and research implications. In: Shriqui C, Nasrallah H, editors. Contemporary issues in the treatment of schizophrenia. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press, 1995: 883–46
Awad AG, Voruganti LNP, Heslegrave RJ. Measuring quality of life in patients with schizophrenia. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 11: 32–47
Lehman A. The wellbeing of chronic mental patients: assessing their quality of life. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1983; 40: 369–73
Sullivan G, Wells K, Leake B. Quality of life of seriously mentally ill persons in Mississippi. Hosp Community Psychiatry 1991; 42: 752–4
Voruganti LNP, Heslegrave RJ, Awad AG, et al. Quality of life measurement in schizophrenia: reconciling the quest for subjectivity with the question of reliability. Psychol Med 1998; 28: 165–72
Awad AG, Voruganti LNP. Cost-utility analysis in schizophrenia. J Clin Psychiatry 1999; 60 Suppl. 3: 22–9
Voruganti L, Cortese L, Ouyewumi L, et al. Comparative evaluation of conventional and new antipsychotic drugs with reference to their subjective tolerability, side effect profile and impact on quality of life. Schizophr Res. In press
Drummond M, Stoddart G, Torrance G. Cost-utility analysis. In: Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programs. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications, 1987: 112–38
Torrance G. Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40: 593–600
Revicki D. Relationship between health utility and psychometric health status measures. Med Care 1992; 30 Suppl.: MS274–82
Revicki D, Luce BR. Pharmacoeconomics research applied to psychopharmacology development and evaluation: methods of pharmacoeconomic evaluation of new medical treatments in psychiatry. Psychopharmacol Bull 1995; 31: 57–65
Hargreaves WA, Shumway M. Pharmacoeconomics of antipsychotic drug therapy. J Clin Psychiatry 1996; 57 Suppl. 9: 66–76
Revicki D, Shakespeare A, Kind P. Preferences for schizophrenia related health states: a comparison of patients, care givers and psychiatrists. Int Clin Psychopharmacology 1996; 11: 101–8
Chouinard G, Albright P. Economic and health state utility determinations for schizophrenic patients treated with risperidone or haloperidol. J Clin Psychopharmacol 1997; 17 (4): 298–307
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 1994
Kay S, Opler L, Lindenmayer J. Reliability of positive and negative syndrome scale for schizophrenia. Psychiatry Res 1988; 23: 99–110
Amador X, Strauss DH, Yale SA, et al. Assessment of insight in psychosis. Am J Psychiatry 1993: 150: 873–80
Heinrichs D, Hanlon E, Carpenter W, et al. The quality of life scale: an instrument for rating the schizophrenic deficit syndrome. Schizophr Bull 1984; 10: 388–98
Bergner M, Bobbit RA, Carter WB, et al. The sickness impact profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Med Care 1981; 19: 787–805
Voruganti L, Awad AG. Sickness impact profile (SIP) as a measure of patients’ quality of life (QOL) in clinical trials involving antipsychotic drugs. Annual Meeting of the American College of Neuro-Psychopharmacology; 1995 Dec 4–10; Puerto Rico
Endicott J, Spitzer RL, Fleiss JL, et al. The global assessment scale: a procedure for measuring overall severity of psychiatric disturbance. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1976; 33: 766–71
Gurin G, Verhoff J, Felds S. Americans view their mental health. New York (NY): Russell Sage Foundation, 1960
Llewellyn-Thomas H, Sutherland H, Tibshirani R, et al. Describing health states. Med Care 1984; 22: 543–52
von Neumann J, Morgenstern O. Theory of games and economic behaviour. 2nd ed. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press, 1947
Revicki D, Brown RE, Keller M, et al. Cost-effectiveness of new antidepressants compared with tricyclic antidepressants in managed care settings. J Clin Psychiatry 1997; 58: 47–58
Froberg D, Kane R. Methodology for measuring health state preferences: I. Measurement strategy. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42: 345–54
Froberg D, Kane R. Methodology for measuring health states preferences: II. Scaling methods. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42: 459–71
Froberg D, Kane R. Methodology for measuring health states preferences: III. Population and context effects. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42: 585–92
Revicki D, Murray M. Assessing mental health-related quality of life outcomes of drug treatments for psychiatric disorders. CNS Drugs 1994; 1: 465–76
Acknowledgements
The project was jointly funded by Ontario’s Ministry of Education and Training and Janssen-Ortho Inc. under the University Research Incentive Fund (Grant # WE26-004) Competition (1995-96). The authors also wish to thank Dr Martha Shumway for her helpful suggestions in developing the utility measurement protocol.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Voruganti, L.N.P., Awad, A.G., Kola Oyewumi, L. et al. Assessing Health Utilities in Schizophrenia. Pharmacoeconomics 17, 273–286 (2000). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200017030-00005
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200017030-00005