Dimensions Used in Instruments for QALY Calculation: A Systematic Review

被引:23
作者
Toure, Moustapha [1 ,2 ]
Kouakou, Christian R. C. [1 ,2 ]
Poder, Thomas G. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sherbrooke, Business Sch, Dept Econ, Sherbrooke, PQ J1K 2R1, Canada
[2] CIUSSS Est Lile Montreal, Ctr Rech IUSMM, Montreal, PQ H1N 3V2, Canada
[3] Univ Montreal, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Management Evaluat & Hlth Policy, Montreal, PQ H3N 1X9, Canada
关键词
QALY; utility; impact; instrument development; economic assessment; PREFERENCE-BASED MEASURE; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; HEALTH STATE CLASSIFICATION; DISCRETE-CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; ECONOMIC-EVALUATION; UTILITY WEIGHTS; RASCH ANALYSIS; SINGLE INDEX; VALUATION; VALIDATION;
D O I
10.3390/ijerph18094428
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Economic assessment is of utmost importance in the healthcare decision-making process. The quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) concept provides a rare opportunity to combine two crucial aspects of health, i.e., mortality and morbidity, into a single index to perform cost-utility comparison. Today, many tools are available to measure morbidity in terms of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and a large literature describes how to use them. Knowing their characteristics and development process is a key point for elaborating, adapting, or selecting the most well-suited instrument for further needs. In this aim, we conducted a systematic review on instruments used for QALY calculation, and 46 studies were selected after searches in four databases: Medline EBSCO, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and PubMed. The search procedure was done to identify all relevant publications up to 18 June 2020. We mainly focused on the type of instrument developed (i.e., generic or specific), the number and the nature of dimensions and levels used, the elicitation method and the model selected to determine utility scores, and the instrument and algorithm validation methods. Results show that studies dealing with the development of specific instruments were mostly motivated by the inappropriateness of generic instruments in their field. For the dimensions' and levels' selection, item response theory, Rasch analysis, and literature review were mostly used. Dimensions and levels were validated by methods like the Loevinger H, the standardised response mean, or discussions with experts in the field. The time trade-off method was the most widely used elicitation method, followed by the visual analogue scale. Random effects regression models were frequently used in determining utility scores.
引用
收藏
页数:22
相关论文
共 74 条
  • [1] Developing a cerebral palsy-specific preference-based measure for a six-dimensional classification system (CP-6D): protocol for a valuation study
    Bahrampour, Mina
    Norman, Richard
    Byrnes, Joshua
    Downes, Martin
    Scuffham, Paul A.
    [J]. BMJ OPEN, 2019, 9 (09):
  • [2] Validation of the IPC65 questionnaire: a tool to measure interdisciplinarity in clinical practice
    Bedard, Suzanne K.
    Poder, Thomas G.
    Lariviere, Claude
    [J]. SANTE PUBLIQUE, 2013, 25 (06): : 763 - 773
  • [3] Berchtold A., 2016, Methodol. Innov, V9, P1, DOI DOI 10.1177/2059799116672875
  • [4] Integrating preferences into health status assessment for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: The ALS Utility Index
    Beusterien, K
    Leigh, N
    Jackson, C
    Miller, R
    Mayo, K
    Revicki, D
    [J]. AMYOTROPHIC LATERAL SCLEROSIS AND OTHER MOTOR NEURON DISORDERS, 2005, 6 (03): : 169 - 176
  • [5] Deriving a preference-based single index from the UK SF-36 Health Survey
    Brazier, J
    Usherwood, T
    Harper, R
    Thomas, K
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1998, 51 (11) : 1115 - 1128
  • [6] Estimation of a preference-based index from a condition-specific measure: The King's Health Questionnaire
    Brazier, John
    Czoski-Murray, Carolyn
    Roberts, Jennifer
    Brown, Martin
    Symonds, Tara
    Kelleher, Con
    [J]. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2008, 28 (01) : 113 - 126
  • [7] Estimating a preference-based index for a menopause specific health quality of life questionnaire
    Brazier J.E.
    Roberts J.
    Platts M.
    Zoellner Y.F.
    [J]. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 3 (1)
  • [8] Developing a New Version of the SF-6D Health State Classification System From the SF-36v2: SF-6Dv2
    Brazier, John E.
    Mulhern, Brendan J.
    Bjorner, Jakob B.
    Gandek, Barbara
    Rowen, Donna
    Alonso, Jordi
    Vilagut, Gemma
    Ware, John E.
    [J]. MEDICAL CARE, 2020, 58 (06) : 557 - 565
  • [9] A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures
    Brazier, John E.
    Yang, Yaling
    Tsuchiya, Aki
    Rowen, Donna Louise
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2010, 11 (02) : 215 - 225
  • [10] Developing a preference-based glaucoma utility index using a discrete choice experiment
    Burr, Jennifer M.
    Kilonzo, Mary
    Vale, Luke
    Ryan, Mandy
    [J]. OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE, 2007, 84 (08) : 797 - 808