A review of health-utility data for osteoarthritis: Implications for clinical trial-based evaluation

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 26, Issue 11, 2008, Pages 925-935

  Ruchlin, Hirsch S ^a   Insinga, Ralph P ^b  

^a HSR   (United States)

^b MERCK RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (United States)

Author keywords

Osteoarthritis, general; Quality of life rating scales; Utility measurement

Indexed keywords

CHRONIC PAIN; COMORBIDITY; DATA BASE; DISEASE SEVERITY; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; OSTEOARTHRITIS; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; MODELS, ECONOMIC; OSTEOARTHRITIS; PAIN; PAIN MEASUREMENT; QUALITY OF LIFE;

EID: 53849147235     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200826110-00005     Document Type: Review

References (45)

1. Woolf AD, Pfleger B. Burden of major musculoskeletal conditions. Bull World Health Organ 2003; 81: 646-56
2. World Health Organization. Chronic rheumatic conditions [on-line]. Available from URL: http://www.who.int/chp/topics/rheumatic/en/index.html [Accessed 2008 Sep 9]
3. Tengs TO, Wallace A. One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. Med Care 2000; 38: 583-637
4. Bell CM, Chapman RH, Stone PW, et al. An off-the-shelf help list: a comprehensive catalog of preference scores from published cost-utility analyses. Med Decis Making 2001; 21: 288-94
5. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996
6. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005
7. Parkin D, Devlin N. Is there a case for using visual analogue scale valuations in cost-utility analysis? Health Econ 2006; 15: 653-64
8. Fryback DG, Dasbach EJ, Klein R, et al. The Beaver Dam Health Outcomes Study: initial catalog of health-state quality factors. Med Decis Making 1993; 13: 89-102
9. Fryback DG, Lawrence WF, Martin PA, et al. Predicting Quality of Well-being scores from the SF-36: results from the Beaver Dam Health Outcomes Study. Med Decis Making 1997; 17: 1-9
10. Nord E. Unjustified use of the Quality of Well-Being Scale in priority setting in Oregon. Health Policy 1993; 24: 45-53
11. Neumann P. The CEA Registry [online]. Available from URL: https://research.tufts-nemc.org/cear/default.aspx [Accessed 2008 Sep 9]
12. Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 1997; 35: 1095-108
13. Drummond M. Introducing economic and quality of life measurements into clinical studies. Ann Med 2001; 33: 344-9
14. Walters SJ, Brazier JE. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res 2005; 14: 1523-32
15. Hawthorne G, Osborne R. Population norms and meaningful differences for the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) measure. Aust N Z J Public Health 2005; 29: 136-42
16. Cochrane T, Davey RC, Matthes Edwards SM. Randomised controlled trial of the cost-effectiveness of water-based therapy for lower limb osteoarthritis. Health Technol Assess 2005; 9: iii-xi, 1
17. McCarthy CJ, Mills PM, Pullen R, et al. Supplementation of a home-based exercise programme with a class-based programme for people with osteoarthritis of the knees: a randomised controlled trial and health economic analysis. Health Technol Assess 2004; 8: iii-61
18. Pipitone N, Scott DL. Magnetic pulse treatment for knee osteoarthritis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Curr Med Res Opin 2001; 17: 190-6
19. Raynauld JP, Torrance GW, Band PA, et al. A prospective, randomized, pragmatic, health outcomes trial evaluating the incorporation of hylan G-F 20 into the treatment paradigm for patients with knee osteoarthritis (part 1 of 2): clinical results. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2002; 10: 506-17
20. Brazier JE, Harper R, Munro J, et al. Generic and condition-specific outcome measures for people with osteoarthritis of the knee. Rheumatology (Oxford) 1999; 38: 870-7
21. Brazier J, Roberts J, Tsuchiya A, et al. A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Econ 2004; 13 (9): 873-84
22. Fransen M, Edmonds J. Reliability and validity of the EuroQol in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Rheumatology (Oxford) 1999; 38: 807-13
23. Ostendorf M, van Stel HF, Buskens E, et al. Patient-reported outcome in total hip replacement: a comparison of five instruments of health status. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004; 86: 801-8
24. Pollard TC, Baker RP, Eastaugh-Waring SJ, et al. Treatment of the young active patient with osteoarthritis of the hip: a five- to seven-year comparison of hybrid total hip arthroplasty and metal-on-metal resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006; 88: 592-600
25. Wolfe F, Hawley DJ. Measurement of the quality of life in rheumatic disorders using the EuroQol. Br J Rheumatol 1997; 36: 786-93
26. Blanchard C, Feeny D, Mahon JL, et al. Is the Health Utilities Index responsive in total hip arthroplasty patients? J Clin Epidemiol 2003; 56: 1046-54
27. Mahon JL, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH, et al. Health-related quality of life and mobility of patients awaiting elective total hip arthroplasty: a prospective study. CMAJ 2002; 167: 1115-21
28. Feeny D, Wu L, Eng K. Comparing short form 6D, standard gamble, and Health Utilities Index Mark 2 and Mark 3 utility scores: results from total hip arthroplasty patients. Qual Life Res 2004; 13: 1659-70
29. Hirvonen J, Blom M, Tuominen U, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients waiting for major joint replacement: a comparison between patients and population controls. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006; 4: 3 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1373609 [Accessed 2008 Sep 16]
30. Rissanen P, Aro S, Slatis P, et al. Health and quality of life before and after hip or knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1995; 10: 169-75
31. Rissanen P, Aro S, Sintonen H, et al. Quality of life and functional ability in hip and knee replacements: a prospective study. Qual Life Res 1996; 5: 56-64
32. Rissanen P, Aro S, Sintonen H, et al. Costs and cost-effectiveness in hip and knee replacements: a prospective study. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1997; 13: 575-88
33. Ackerman IN, Graves SE, Wicks IP, et al. Severely compromised quality of life in women and those of lower socioeconomic status waiting for joint replacement surgery. Arthritis Rheum 2005; 53: 653-8
34. Whitfield K, Buchbinder R, Segal L, et al. Parsimonious and efficient assessment of health-related quality of life in osteoarthritis research: validation of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006; 4: 19
35. Ethgen O, Tancredi A, Lejeune E, et al. Do utility values and willingness to pay suitably reflect health outcome in hip and knee osteoarthritis? A comparative analysis with the WOMAC Index. J Rheumatol 2003; 30: 2452-9
36. Laupacis A, Bourne R, Rorabeck C, et al. The effect of elective total hip replacement on health-related quality of life. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1993; 75: 1619-26
37. Feeny D, Furlong W, Boyle M, et al. Multi-attribute health status classification systems: Health Utilities Index. Pharmacoeconomics 1995; 7: 490-502
38. The EuroQol Group. EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990; 16: 199-208
39. Walters SJ, Brazier JE. What is the relationship between the minimally important difference and health state utility values? The case of the SF-6D. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003; 1: 4 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.pubmedcen-tral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=155547 [Accessed 2008 Sep 15]
40. Brauer CA, Rosen AB, Greenberg D, et al. Trends in the measurement of health utilities in published cost-utility analyses. Value Health 2006; 9: 213-8
41. Xie F, Li SC, Luo N, et al. Comparison of the EuroEol and short form 6D in Singapore multiethnic Asian knee osteoarthritis patients scheduled for total knee replacement. Arthritis Rheum 2007; 57: 1043-9
42. Bosch JL, Hunink MG. Comparison of the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) and the EuroQol EQ-5D in patients treated for intermittent claudication. Qual Life Res 2000; 9: 591-601
43. De Wit GA, Busschbach JJ, De Charro FT. Sensitivity and perspective in the valuation of health status: whose values count? Health Econ 2000; 9: 109-26
44. Insinga RP, Fryback DG. Understanding differences between self-ratings and population ratings for health in the EuroQOL. Qual Life Res 2003; 12: 611-9
45. Segal L, Day SE, Chapman AB, et al. Can we reduce disease burden from osteoarthrtis? Med J Aust 2004; 180: S11-7