nach oben

PharmacoEconomics

Erschienen in:

01.06.2004 | Original Research Article

Psychometric and Utility-Based Measures of Health Status of Asthmatic Patients with Different Disease Control Level

verfasst von: Dr Ágota Szende, Klas Svensson, Elisabeth Ståhl, Ágnes Mészáros, Gyula Y. Berta

Erschienen in: PharmacoEconomics | Ausgabe 8/2004

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objective: To explore the relationship between asthma control level and healthrelated QOL (HR-QOL), and to understand the role of various psychometric and utility-based methods in studying this relationship.

Methods: Two hundred and twenty-eight consecutive adult outpatients and inpatients at four sites participated in the study. Physicians identified the level of disease control according to the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) classification system. Patients filled in three different HR-QOL questionnaires (EuroQol 5-D [EQ-5D], Short-Form 36-item health survey [SF-36], and St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ]) and a direct time trade-off question. The Short Form- 6D (SF-6D) was used to derive utility values from SF-36 data.

Results: All patient-reported evaluation methods could discriminate between patients with different disease control levels, and both generic and diseasespecific instruments strongly correlated to each other. The magnitude of differences in HR-QOL between groups with different disease control levels was clinically meaningful. All three HR-QOL measures reflected a relationship between disease control level and HR-QOL, but the actual pattern of the relationship depended on the instrument used. Utilities gained from the EQ-5D index, compared with the SF-6D index, had higher values in the patient group with the best disease control and lower values in the patient group with poor disease control.

Conclusions: When choosing an instrument to measure the health status of asthmatic patients in clinical studies, the severity range of the study population should be considered. Researchers might prefer to use the EQ-5D in asthma patients with severe disease or poor disease control and the SF-6D in patients with mild disease or good disease control.

Based on this question, for example, if 15 years of life in perfect health was equivalent to an individual with 20 years of time in his/her current health then the corresponding utility value was calculated to be 15/20, i.e. 0.75.

Kuzniar et al.[26] also reported MIDs for the SGRQ in a Polish validation study among asthmatic patients. 5.3 points on the SGRQ questionnaire has been identified as the threshold value in their study.

The International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC) Steering Committee. Worldwide variation in prevalence of symptoms of asthma, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and atopic eczema: ISAAC. Lancet 1998 Apr 25; 351 (9111): 1225–32CrossRef

WHO. Bronchial asthma fact sheet. World Health Organization fact sheet N 206 2000 [online]. Available from URL: http:// www.who.int [Accessed February 2003]

Burney PGL. Epidemiology of asthma. Allergy 1993; 48: 17–21PubMedCrossRef

Global Initiative for Asthma. Pocket guide for asthma management and prevention. Bethesda (MD): National Institute of Health, Nov 1998. NIH Pub. No. 96–3659B

Guidelines on the management of asthma. Statement by the British Thoracic Society, the British Paediatric Association, the Research Unit of the Royal College of Physicians of London, the King’s Fund Centre, the National Asthma Campaign, the Royal College of General Practitioners, the General Practitioners in Asthma Group, the British Assoc. of Accident and Emergency Medicine and the British Paediatric Respiratory Group [published erratum appears in Thorax 1994 Jan; 49 (1): 96 and Thorax 1994 Apr; 49 (4): 386]. Thorax 1993 Mar; 482 Suppl.: Sl-24

Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma: expert panel report no 2. Bethesda (MD): National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, 1997, NIH Publication No. 97–4051

Cockcroft DW, Swystun VA. Asthma control versus asthma severity. J Allergy Clin Imminol 1996; 98 (6 Pt 1): 1016–8CrossRef

Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Ferrie PJ, et al. Measuring quality of life in asthma. Am Rev Respir Dis 1993; 147: 832–8PubMed

Wijnhoven HA, Kriegsman DM, Hesselink AE, et al. Determinants of different dimensions of disease severity in asthma and COPD: pulmonary function and health-related quality of life. Chest 2001; 119 (4): 1034–42PubMedCrossRef

10.

Graham DM, Blaiss MS, Bayliss MS, et al. Impact of changes in asthma severity on health-related quality of life in pediatric and adult asthma patients: results from the asthma outcomes monitoring system. Allergy Asthma Proc 2000; 21 (3): 151–8PubMedCrossRef

11.

Moy ML, Israel E, Weiss ST, et al. Clinical predictors of healthrelated quality of life depend on asthma severity. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2001; 163 (4): 924–9PubMed

12.

Huss K, Naumann PL, Mason PJ, et al. Asthma severity, atopic status, allergen exposure and quality of life in elderly persons. Ann Allergy Asthma Imminol 2001; 86 (5): 524–30CrossRef

13.

Sawyer MG, Spurrier N, Whaites L, et al. The relationship between asthma severity, family functioning and the healthrelated quality of life of children with asthma. Qual Life Res 2000; 9 (10): 1105–15PubMedCrossRef

14.

Ferrucci L, Baldasseeroni S, Bandielli S, et al. Disease severity and health-related quality of life across different chronic conditions. J Am Geriatr Soc 2000; 48 (11): 1490–5PubMed

15.

Az asthma bronchiale diagnosztikája és terápiája. A Tódogyógyászati Szakmai Kollégium ajánlása. Med Thorac 2001; 54 (3): 83–94

16.

EuroQol Group. EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality oflife. Health Policy 1990; 16: 199–208CrossRef

17.

Kind P, Hardman G, Macran S. UK population norms for EQ-5D. Discussion Paper 172. York: York Centre for Health Economics, 1999

18.

Ware IE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS SF-36-item short form health survey (SF-36). I: conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30 (6): 473–81PubMedCrossRef

19.

Brazier IE, Usherwood TP, Harper R, et al. Deriving a preference- based single index measure for health from the SF-36. J Clin Epidemiol1998; 51 (11): 1115–29

20.

Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preferencebased measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002; 21 (2): 271–92PubMedCrossRef

21.

Jones PW, Quirk FR, Baveystock CM, et al. A self-complete measure of health status for chronic airflow limitation: the St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire. Am Rev Respir Dis 1992; 145: 1321–7PubMed

22.

Torrance GW. Social preferences for health states: an empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. Socioecon Plann Sci 1976; 10 (3): 129–36CrossRef

23.

Hays RD, Woolley JM. The concept of clinically meaningful difference in health-related quality-of-life research: how meaningful is it? Pharmacoeconomics 2000; 18 (5): 419–23PubMedCrossRef

24.

Jones PW, Quirk FH, Baveystock CM. The St George’s respiratory questionnaire. Respir Med 1991; 85 Suppl. B: 25–31

25.

Jones PW. Health status measurement in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax 2001; 56: 880–7PubMedCrossRef

26.

Kuzniar T, Patkowski J, Liebhart J, et al. Validation of the Polish version of St George’s respiratory questionnaire in patients with bronchial asthma. Pneumonol Alergol Pol 1999; 67 (11–12): 497–503PubMed

27.

Paterson C. Measuring outcomes in primary care: a patient generated measure, MYMOP, compared with the SF-36 health survey. BMJ 1996 Apr 20; 312 (7037): 1016–20PubMedCrossRef

28.

Bousquet J, Knani J, Dhivert H, et al. Quality oflife in asthma. I: internal consistency and validity of the SF-36 questionnaire. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1994; 149: 371–5PubMed

29.

Aas K. Heterogeneity of bronchial asthma. Sub-populations: or different stages of the disease. Allergy 1981 Jan; 36 (1): 3–14PubMedCrossRef

30.

MCilken R, CustersF, VanDoorslaer EKA, et al. Comparison of performance of four instruments in evaluating the effects of salrreterol on asthma quality of life. Eur Respir J 1995; 8: 888–98

31.

Juniper EF, Norman GR, Cox FM, et al. Comparison of the standard gamble, rating scale, AQLQ and SF-36 for measuring quality of life. Eur Respir J 2001; 18: 38–44PubMedCrossRef

32.

Paltiel AD, Fuhlbrigge AL, Kitch BT, et al. Cost-effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroids in adults with mild-to-moderate asthma: results from the asthma policy model. J Allergy Clin Imminol 2001; 108 (1): 39–49CrossRef

33.

Revicki DA, Kaplan RM. Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of healthrelated quality of life. Qual Life Res 1993; 2 (6): 477–87PubMedCrossRef

34.

Green C, Brazier J, Deverill M. A review of health state valuation techniques. Pharmacoeconomics 2000; 17 (2): 151–65PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Psychometric and Utility-Based Measures of Health Status of Asthmatic Patients with Different Disease Control Level
verfasst von: Dr Ágota Szende
Klas Svensson
Elisabeth Ståhl
Ágnes Mészáros
Gyula Y. Berta
Publikationsdatum: 01.06.2004
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: PharmacoEconomics / Ausgabe 8/2004
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Elektronische ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200422080-00005

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 8/2004

Outcome Measures for Pharmacoeconomics Education

An Economic Evaluation of Fluvastatin used for the Prevention of Cardiac Events Following Successful First Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the UK

Growth Hormone Therapy and Quality of Life in Adults and Children

The Role of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in the Era of Pharmacogenomics

Pharmacogenomics and the Evolution of Healthcare