Comparing Short Form 6D, Standard Gamble, and Health Utilities Index Mark 2 and Mark 3 utility scores: Results from total hip arthroplasty patients

被引:0
作者
David Feeny
Lieling Wu
Ken Eng
机构
[1] Institute of Health Economics,Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences
[2] University of Alberta,Department of Medicine
[3] Health Utilities Incorporated,undefined
[4] University of Alberta,undefined
来源
Quality of Life Research | 2004年 / 13卷
关键词
HUI; Responsiveness; SF-6D; Standard Gamble; Utility Scores;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: The objectives are to compare SF-6D, standard gamble (SG), and Health Utilities Index (HUI) utility scores, compare change scores, and compare responsiveness. Methods: A cohort of osteoarthritis patients referred for total hip arthroplasty (THA) were evaluated at the time of referral and followed until 3 months after THA. Patients were assessed using the SF-36, HUI2, HUI3, and the SG. Agreement is assessed using the intra-class correlation (ICC). Responsiveness is assessed using effect size, standardized response mean, and paired t-test. Results: Data was available for 86 patients at baseline and for 63 at both pre- and post-surgery. At baseline mean SF-6D (0.61), SG (0.62), and HUI2 (0.62) scores were similar; the mean HUI3 score (0.52) was lower. Standard deviations were 0.10, 0.32, 0.19, and 0.22. At baseline, agreement between SF-6D and SG scores was 0.13, agreement between SF-6D and HUI2 was 0.47, and agreement between SF-6D and HUI3 was 0.28. Agreement at pre- and post-surgery was similar. The change in scores between post- and pre-surgery was 0.10 for SF-6D, 0.16 for SG, 0.22 for HUI2, and 0.23 for HUI3. Effect sizes were 1.10 for HUI2, 1.08 for HUI3, 1.06 for SF-6D, and 0.48 for the SG. Conclusions: Agreement between SG scores and SF-6D and HUI scores was low. The estimate of change in utility associated with THA was lowest for SF-6D. Additional longitudinal studies to compare utility measures appear to be warranted.
引用
收藏
页码:1659 / 1670
页数:11
相关论文
共 87 条
[1]  
Ware J.E.(1992)The MOS 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Med Care 30 473-483
[2]  
Sherbourne C.D.(2002)The estimation of a preference-based measure of health status from the SF-36. J Health Econom 21 271-292
[3]  
Brazier J.(2002)The effect of waiting for elective total hip arthroplasty on health-related quality of life. Can med Assoc J 167 1115-1121
[4]  
Roberts J.(2004)Is the Health Utilities Index valid in total hip arthroplasty patients? Qual Life Res 13 339-348
[5]  
Deverill M.(2003)Is the Health Utilities Index responsive in total hip arthroplasty patients? J Clini Epidemiol 56 1046-1054
[6]  
Mahon J.L.(2003)Comparing community-preference based and direct standard gamble utility scores: Evidence from elective total hip arthroplasty. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 19 362-372
[7]  
Bourne R.(2004)The stability of utility scores: Test–retest reliability and the interpretation of utility scores in elective total hip arthroplasty. Qual Life Res 13 15-22
[8]  
Rorabeck C.(2002)Multi-attribute and single-attribute utility functions for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 system. Med Care 40 113-128
[9]  
Feeny D.(2001)The Health Utilities Index (HUI) system for assessing health-related quality of life in clinical studies. Ann Med 33 375-384
[10]  
Stitt L.(1992)A comprehensive multiattribute system for classifying the health status of survivors of childhood cancer. J Clin Oncol 10 923-928