Cost-utility analysis in evaluating prophylaxis in haemophilia

Haemophilia, Supplement

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 50-57

  Carcao, Manuel ^a   Ungar, W J ^a,b   Feldman, B M ^a,b  

^a HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Cost utility analysis; Haemophilia; Health related quality of life; Pharmacoeconomics

Indexed keywords

RECOMBINANT BLOOD CLOTTING FACTOR 8; RECOMBINANT BLOOD CLOTTING FACTOR 9;

ARTHROPATHY; ARTICLE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ASPECT; HEALTH CARE COST; HEMARTHROSIS; HEMOPHILIA A; HEMOPHILIA B; HUMAN; LIFESPAN; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROPHYLAXIS; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE; RATING SCALE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; CHILD; COST; COST OF ILLNESS; DRUG COST; ECONOMICS; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEY; REVIEW;

CHILD; COST OF ILLNESS; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; DRUG COSTS; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HEMOPHILIA A; HUMANS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 11044239237     PISSN: 13550691     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1355-0691.2004.00879.x     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Cooke J. Pharmacoeconomics of haemophilia. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 1997; 8(Suppl. 1): S41-4.
2. Furlong WJ, Feeny DH, Torrance GW, Barr RD. The Health Utilities Index (HUI) system for assessing health-related quality of life in clinical studies. Ann Med 2001; 33: 375-84.
3. Drummond MF, O'Brien BJ, Stoddart GL et al. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
4. Brown MM. Health care economic analyses. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2003; 14: 117-21.
5. Brown MM, Brown GC, Sharma S, Landy J. Health care economic analyses and value-based medicine. Surv Ophthalmol 2003; 48: 204-23.
6. Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, Tugwell PX. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. Can Med Assoc J 1992; 146: 473-81.
7. Hunink MG, Wong JB, Donaldson MC, Meyerovitz MF, de Vries J, Harrington DP. Revascularization for femoropopliteal disease. A decision and cost-effectiveness analysis. JAMA 1995; 274: 165-71.
8. Bowe TR. Measuring patient preferences: rating scale versus standard gamble. Med Decis Making 1995; 15: 283-5.
9. Feeny D, Torrance GW. Health utilities index. In: Spilker B, ed. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clincal Trials. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers, 1996: 239-52.
10. Torrance GW, Feeny D, Furlong W. Visual analog scales: do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health states? Med Decis Making 2001; 21: 329-34.
11. Froberg DG, Kane RL. Methodology for measuring health-state preferences - I. Measurement strategies. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42: 345-54.
12. Hyland ME. Quality-of-life measures as providers of information on value-for-money of health interventions. Comparison and recommendations for practice. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 11: 19-31.
13. Von Neumann J, Morgenstern O. Theory of Games and Economic Behaviour. New York: Wiley, 1953.
14. Mehrez A, Gafni A. Quality-adjusted life years, utility theory, and healthy-years equivalents. Med Decis Making 1989; 9 142-9.
15. Fantini F, Corvaglia G, Bergomi P et al. Validation of the Italian version of the Stanford Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire for measuring functional status in children with chronic arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 1995; 13: 785-91.
16. Singh G, Athreya BH, Fries JF, Goldsmith DP. Measurement of health status in children with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1994; 37: 1761-9.
17. Fan JS, Wessel J, Ellsworth J. The relationship between strength and function in females with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 1998; 25: 1399-405.
18. Moroldo MB, Giannini EH. Estimates of the discriminant ability of definitions of improvement for juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 1998; 25: 986-9.
19. Kaplan RM, Ernst JA. Do category rating scales produce biased preference weights for a health index? Med Care 1983; 21: 193-207.
20. Gudex C, Dolan P, Kind P, Williams A. Health state valuations from the general public using the visual analogue scale. Qual Life Res 1996; 5: 521-31.
21. Torrance GW. Social preferences for health states: an empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. Socio-Econom Plann Sci 1976; 10: 128-36.
22. Torrance GW, Sackett DL, Thomas WH. Utility maximization model for program evaluation: a demonstration application. In: Berg RL, ed. Health Status Indexes. Chicago: Hospital Research and Educational Trust, 1973: 156-71.
23. Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996; 37: 53-72.
24. Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 1997; 35: 1095-108.
25. Torrance GW, Boyle MH, Horwood SP. Application of multi-attribute utility theory to measure social preferences for health states. Oper Res 1982; 30: 1043-69.
26. O'Brien BJ, Torrance GW, Moran LA. A Practical Guide to Health State Preference Measurement: a Video Introduction. Working Paper No. 95-97. Hamilton: Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, 1995.
27. Feeny D, Furlong W, Barr RD, Torrance GW, Rosenbaum P, Weitzman S. A comprehensive multiattribute system for classifying the health status of survivors of childhood cancer. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10: 923-8.
28. Furlong WJ, Feeny DH. Health Utility Index. Hamilton: Center for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, 1998: 2-3.
29. Torrance GW, Feeny DH, Furlong WJ, Barr RD, Zhang Y, Wang Q. Multiattribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system: Health Utilities Index Mark 2. Med Care 1996; 34: 702-22.
30. Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW et al. Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 system. Med Care 2002; 40: 113-28.
31. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Griffith LE, Ferrie PJ. Minimum skills required by children to complete health-related quality of life instruments for asthma: comparison of measurement properties. Eur Respir J 1997; 10: 2285-94.
32. Brunner HI, Maker D, Grundland B et al. Preference-based measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQL) in children with chronic musculoskeletal disorders (MSKDs). Med Decis Making 2003; 23: 314-22.
33. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Advances in prospect theory. Cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncert 1992; 5 297-323.
34. Sung L, Greenberg ML, Young NL et al. Validity of a modified standard gamble elicited from parents of a hospital-based cohort of children. J Clin Epidemiol 2003; 56: 848-55.
35. Landgraf J, Abertz L, Ware J. Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ): a User's Manual. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center, 1996.
36. Revicki DA, Kaplan RM. Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res 1993; 2: 477-87.
37. Nease RF Jr, Tsai R, Hynes LM, Littenberg B. Automated utility assessment of global health. Qual Life Res 1996; 5: 175-82.
38. Naraine VS, Risebrough NA, Oh P et al. Health-related quality-of-life treatments for severe haemophilia: utility measurements using the Standard Gamble technique. Haemophilia 2002; 8: 112-20.
39. Lenert L, Kaplan RM. Validity and interpretation of preference-based measures of health-related quality of life. Med Care 2000; 38: II138-50.
40. Hall J, Gerard K, Salkeld G, Richardson J. A cost utility analysis of mammography screening in Australia. Soc Sci Med 1992; 34: 993-1004.
41. Badia X, Roset M, Herdman M, Kind P. A comparison of United Kingdom and Spanish general population time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states. Med Decis Making 2001; 21: 7-16.
42. Sculpher MJ, O'Brien BJ. Income effects of reduced health and health effects of reduced income: implications for health-state valuation. Med Decis Making 2000; 20: 207-15.
43. Heemstra H, Zwaan T, Hemels M et al. Long term cost of illness study for severe hemophilic children in Toronto. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Safety 2003; 3: 339-40 [Abstract PPT5].
44. Zwaan T, Heemstra H, Kern M et al. Cost analysis of prophylactic treatment of children with severe hemophilia A in Canada. Value Health 2003; 3: 338 [Abstract PPT2].
45. Schramm W. Experience with prophylaxis in Germany. Semin Hematol 1993; 30: 12-5.
46. Bohn RL, Avorn J, Glynn RJ, Choodnovskiy I, Haschemeyer R, Aledort LM. Prophylactic use of factor VIII. an economic evaluation. Thromb Haemost 1998; 79: 932-7.
47. Smith PS, Teutsch SM, Shaffer PA, Rolka H, Evatt B. Episodic versus prophylactic infusions for hemophilia A: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Pediatr 1996; 129: 424-31.
48. Szucs TD, Offner A, Schramm W. Socioeconomic impact of haemophilia care. Haemophilia 1996; 2: 211-7.
49. Miners AH, Sabin CA, Tolley KH, Lee CA. Assessing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis against bleeding in patients with severe haemophilia and severe von Willebrand's disease. J Intern Med 1998; 244: 515-22.
50. Miners AH, Sabin CA, Tolley KH, Ebrahim S, Lee CA. Assessing health-related quality-of-life in patients with severe haemophilia A and B. Psychol Health Med 1999; 4: 5-15.
51. Miners AH, Sabin CA, Tolley KH, Lee CA. Cost-utility analysis of primary prophylaxis versus treatment on-demand for individuals with severe haemophilia. Pharmacoeconomics 2002; 20: 759-74.
52. Blanchette VS, McCready M, Achonu C, Abdolell M, Rivard G, Manco-Johnson MJ. A survey of factor prophylaxis in boys with haemophilia followed in North American haemophilia treatment centres. Haemophilia 2003; 9(Suppl. 1): 19-26.
53. Carlsson M, Berntorp E, Bjorkman S, Lindvall K. Pharmacokinetic dosing in prophylactic treatment of hemophilia A. Eur J Haematol 1993; 51: 247-52.