The relationship between health perception and utility in heart failure patients in a clinical trial: Results from an OVERTURE substudy

Journal of Cardiac Failure

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 339-343

  Havranek, Edward P ^a   Simon, Teresa A ^b   L'Italien, Gilbert ^b   Smitten, Allison ^b   Brett Hauber, A ^b   Chen, Roland ^b   Lapuerta, Pablo ^b  

^a DENVER HEALTH MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b Denver Health Medical Center #0960 ^*

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness analysis; Heart failure; Omapatrilat; Quality of life

Indexed keywords

OMAPATRILAT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HEART FAILURE; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PERCEPTION; POSTAL MAIL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; TELEPHONE;

AGED; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HEART FAILURE, CONGESTIVE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NORTH AMERICA; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PERCEPTION; STATISTICS;

EID: 4143106908     PISSN: 10719164     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2003.11.002     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Gold M., Siegel J., Russell L., Weinstein M.C. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. 1996;Oxford University Press, New York
2. Stanek E., Oates M., McGhan W., DeNofrio D., Loh E. Preferences for treatment outcomes in patients with heart failure: symptoms versus survival. J Cardiac Failure. 6:2000;225-232
3. Rector T., Tschumperlin L.K., Kubo S.H., Bank A.J., Francis G.S., McDonald K.M., et al. Use of the Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire to ascertain patients' perspectives on improvement in quality of life versus risk of drug-induced death. J Cardiac Failure. 1:1995;201-206
4. Torrance G.W. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: a review. J Health Economics. 5:1986;1-30
5. Drummond M.F., O'Brien B., Stoddart G.L., Torrance G.W. Methods for the evaluation of health care programmes. Ed 2:1997;Oxford University Press, Oxford
6. von Neumann J., Morgenstern O. Theory of games and economic behavior. Ed 3.:1953;Princeton University Press, Princeton (NJ)
7. Stalmeier P., Goldstein M., Holmes A., Lenert L., Miyamoto J., Stigglebout A., et al. What should be reported in a methods section on utility assessment? Med Decis Making. 21:2001;200-207
8. Neumann P., Stone P., Chapman R., Sandberg E., Bell C. The quality of reporting in published cost-utility analyses, 1976-1997. Ann Intern Med. 132:2000;964-972
9. Hlatky M.A., Boineau R., Higginbotham M.B., Lee K.L., Mark D.B., Califf R., et al. A brief self-administered questionnaire to determine functional capacity (the Duke Activity Status Index). Am J Cardiol. 64:1989;651-654
10. Packer M., Califf R.M., Konstam M.A., Krum H., McMurray J.J., Rouleau J.L., et al. Comparison of omapatrilat and enalapril inpatients with chronic heart failure: the Omapatrilat Versus Enalapril Randomized Trial of Utility in Reducing Events (OVERTURE). Circulation. 106:2002;920-926
11. Van Wijck E., Bosch J., Hunink M. Time-tradeoff values and standard-gamble utilities assessed during telephone interviews versus face-to-face interviews. Med Decis Making. 18:1998;400-405
12. Havranek E.P., McGovern K.M., Weinberger J., Brocato A., Lowes B.D., Abraham W.T. Patient preferences for heart failure treatment: utilities are valid measures of health-related quality of life in heart failure. J Cardiac Failure. 5:1999;85-91
13. Torrance G., Feeny D., Furlong W.J. Visual analog scales: do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health states? Med Decis Making. 21:2001;329-334
14. Havranek E.P., Lapuerta P., Simon T., L'Italien G., Block A.J., Rouleau J.L. A health perception score predicts cardiac events in patients with heart failure: results from the IMPRESS trial. J Cardiac Failure. 7:2001;153-157
15. Torrance G. Social preferences for health states: an empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. Socio Econ Plan Sci. 10:1976;129-136
16. Bowe T. Measuring patient preferences: rating scale versus standard gamble. Med Decis Making. 15:1995;283-285
17. O'Leary J., Fairclough D., Jankowski M., Weeks J. Comparison of time-tradeoff utilities and rating scale values of cancer patients and their relatives: evidence for a possible plateau effect. Med Decis Making. 15:1995;132-137
18. Tsevat J., Goldman L., Lamas G.A., Pfeffer M.A., Chapin C.C., Connors K.F., et al. Functional status versus utilities in survivors of myocardial infarction. Med Care. 29:1991;1153-1159
19. Mrus J., Yi M., Freedberg K., Wu A., Zackin R., Gorski H., et al. Utilities derived from visual analog scale scores in patients with HIV/AIDS. Med Decis Making. 23:2003;414-421
20. Woloshin S., Schwartz L., Moncur M., Gabriel S., Tosteson A. Assessing values for health: numeracy matters. Med Decis Making. 21:2001;382-390
21. Lipkus I., Samsa G., Rimer B. General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Med Decis Making. 21:2001;37-44
22. Lenert L., Cher D., Goldstein M., Bergen M., Garber A. The effect of search procedures on utility elicitation. Med Decis Making. 18:1998;76-83