Methods and issues associated with the use of quality-adjusted life-years

Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 105-114

  Revicki, Dennis A ^a   Lenderking, William R ^a  

^a UNITED BIOSOURCE CORPORATION   (United States)

Author keywords

cost effectiveness analysis; direct preference methods; health state classification; indirect preference methods; preferences; quality adjusted life years; standard gamble; time trade off; utilities

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC METHOD; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PATIENT PREFERENCE; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE INDEX; REVIEW; SCORING SYSTEM; STANDARD GAMBLE; TIME TRADE OFF; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; WELLBEING;

COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HEALTH POLICY; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; POLICY MAKING; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS;

EID: 84856508049     PISSN: 14737167     EISSN: 17448379     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1586/erp.11.100     Document Type: Review

References (58)

1. Kaplan RM, Bush JW. Health-related quality of life for evaluation research and policy analysis. Health Psychol. 1(1), 621-680 (1982).
2. Weinstein MC, Stason WB. Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. N. Engl. J. Med. 296(13), 716-721 (1977). (Pubitemid 8066534)
3. NICE. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. NICE, London, UK (2004).
4. Cleemput I, Neyt M, Thiry N, de Laet C, Leys M. Threshold Values for Cost-Effectiveness in Health Care. KCE reports 100c. Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre, Brussels, Belgium (2008).
5. Pritchard C. Overseas approaches to decision making. In:Cost Effectiveness Thresholds: Economic and Ethical Issues . Towse A, Pritchard C, Devlin N (Eds). King's Fund and Office of Health Economics, London, UK (2002).
6. Weinstein MC. How much are Americans willing to pay for a quality-adjusted life year? Med. Care 46(4), 343-345 (2008).
7. Caro JJ, Nord E, Siebert U et al. The efficiency frontier approach to economic evaluation of health-care interventions. Health Econ. 19(10), 1117-1127 (2010).
8. Feeny D. Preference-based measures: utility and quality-adjusted life years. In:Assessing Quality of Life in Clinical Trials . Fayers P, Hays RD (Eds). Oxford University Press, NY, USA, 405-429 (2005).
9. Torrance GW, Keresteci MA, Casey RW, Rosner AJ, Ryan N, Breton MC. Development and initial validation of a new preference-based disease-specific health-related quality of life instrument for erectile function. Qual. Life Res. 13(2), 349-359 (2004). (Pubitemid 38392263)
10. Green C, Brazier J, Deverill M. Valuing health-related quality of life. A review of health state valuation techniques. Pharmacoeconomics 17(2), 151-165 (2000). (Pubitemid 30148812)
11. Torrance GW. Social preferences for health states: an empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 10, 129-136 (1976).
12. Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance GW, Barr RD, Horsman J. Guide to Design and Development of Health-State Utility Instrumentation. Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis (CHEPA), McMaster University, ON, Canada (1990).
13. Gwaltney CJ, Shields AL, Shiffman S. Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient-reported outcome measures: a meta-analytic review. Value Health 11(2), 322-333 (2008). (Pubitemid 351473608)
14. Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddart G, Torrance GW. Methods for Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford University Press, NY, USA (1997).
15. Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. J. Health Econ. 5(1), 1-30 (1986). (Pubitemid 16098443)
16. Lenert L, Kaplan RM. Validity and interpretation of preference-based measures of health-related quality of life. Med. Care 38(Suppl. 9), II138-II150 (2000).
17. von Neumann J, Morgenstern O. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press, NJ, USA (1944).
18. Revicki DA, Shakespeare A, Kind P. Preferences for schizophrenia-related health states: a comparison of patients, caregivers and psychiatrists. Int. Clin. Psychopharmacol. 11(2), 101-108 (1996). (Pubitemid 26194509)
19. Kaplan RM, Anderson JP. The general health policy model: an integrated approach. In:Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials . Spilker B (Ed.). Lippencott-Raven Publishers, PA, USA (1996).
20. Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol group. Ann. Med. 33(5), 337-343 (2001). (Pubitemid 32675374)
21. 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. 10(6), 923-928 (1992).
22. Feeny D, Furlong W, Boyle M, Torrance GW. Multi-attribute health status classification systems. Health utilities index. Pharmacoeconomics 7(6), 490-502 (1995).
23. Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW et al. Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system. Med Care. 40(2), 113-128 (2002).
24. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J. Health Econ. 21(2), 271-292 (2002). (Pubitemid 34143147)
25. Petrillo J, Cairns J. Converting condition-specific measures into preference-based outcomes for use in economic evaluation. Exp. Rev. Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res. 8(5), 453-461 (2008).
26. Brooks R, Rabin R, de Charro F. The Measurement and Validation of Health States Using EQ-5D: a European Perspective. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands (2003).
27. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med. Care 30(6), 473-483 (1992).
28. Ara R, Brazier J. Predicting the short form-6D preference-based index using the eight mean short form-36 health dimension scores: estimating preference-based health-related utilities when patient level data are not available. Value Health 12(2), 346-353 (2009).
29. Hanmer J. Predicting an SF-6D preference-based score using MCS and PCS scores from the SF-12 or SF-36. Value Health 12(6), 958-966 (2009).
30. Kaplan RM, Tally S, Hays RD et al. Five preference-based indexes in cataract and heart failure patients were not equally responsive to change. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 64(5), 497-506 (2011).
31. Fryback DG. Measuring health-related quality of life. Workshop on Advancing Social Sciencer Theory: The Importance of Common Metrics. The National Academies, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, DC, USA (2010).
32. Fryback DG, Dunham NC, Palta M et al. US norms for six generic health-related quality-of-life indexes from the national health measurement study. Med. Care 45(12), 1162-1170 (2007).
33. NICE. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. NICE, London, UK (2008).
34. Buxton MJ, Lacey LA, Feagan BG, Niecko T, Miller DW, Townsend RJ. Mapping from disease-specific measures to utility: an analysis of the relationships between the inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire and Crohn's disease activity index in Crohn's disease and measures of utility. Value Health 10(3), 214-220 (2007). (Pubitemid 46802279)
35. Pickard AS, Wilke C, Jung E, Patel S, Stavem K, Lee TA. Use of a preference-based measure of health (EQ-5D) in COPD and asthma. Respir. Med. 102(4), 519-536 (2008).
36. Revicki DA, Leidy NK, Brennan-Diemer F, Sorensen S, Togias A. Integrating patient preferences into health outcomes assessment: the multiattribute asthma symptom utility index. Chest 114(4), 998-1007 (1998). (Pubitemid 28495893)
37. Revicki DA, Leidy NK, Brennan-Diemer F, Thompson C, Togias A. Development and preliminary validation of the multiattribute rhinitis symptom utility index. Qual. Life Res. 7(8), 693-702 (1998). (Pubitemid 29089249)
38. Tomlinson G, Bremner KE, Ritvo P, Naglie G, Krahn MD. Development and validation of a utility weighting function for the Patient-Oriented Prostate Utility Scale (PORPUS). Med. Decis. Making doi:10.1177/0272989X11407203 (2011) (Epub ahead of print).
39. Revicki DA, Kawata AK, Harnam N, Chen WH, Hays RD, Cella D. Predicting EuroQol (EQ-5D) scores from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global items and domain item banks in a United States sample. Qual. Life Res. 18(6), 783-791 (2009).
40. Brazier JE, Yang Y, Tsuchiya A, Rowen DL. A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures. Eur. J. Health Econ. 11(2), 215-225 (2010).
41. Rentz AM, Kowalski JW, Walt J et al. Development of a preference-based index from the NEI visual function questionnaire-25. Qual. Life Res. (2011) (In Press).
42. Bennett KJ, Torrance GW, Boyle MH, Guscott R. Cost-utility analysis in depression: the McSad utility measure for depression health states. Psychiatr. Serv. 51(9), 1171-1176 (2000).
43. Dobrez D, Cella D, Pickard AS, Lai JS, Nickolov A. Estimation of patient preference-based utility weights from the functional assessment of cancer therapy - general. Value Health 10(4), 266-272 (2007). (Pubitemid 47077251)
44. Brazier J, Czoski-Murray C, Roberts J, Brown M, Symonds T, Kelleher C. Estimation of a preference-based index from a condition-specific measure: the King's Health Questionnaire. Med. Decis. Making 28(1), 113-126 (2008).
45. Lamers LM, Uyl-de Groot CA, Buijt I. The use of disease-specific outcome measures in cost-utility analysis: the development of Dutch societal preference weights for the FACT-L scale. Pharmacoeconomics 25(7), 591-603 (2007). (Pubitemid 47048042)
46. McKenna SP, Doughty N, Meads DM, Doward LC, Pepke-Zaba J. The Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR): a measure of health-related quality of life and quality of life for patients with pulmonary hypertension. Qual. Life Res. 15(1), 103-115 (2006). (Pubitemid 43097591)
47. Yang Y, Brazier J, Tsuchiya A, Coyne K. Estimating a preference-based single index from the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire. Value Health 12(1), 159-166 (2009).
48. Petrillo J. Development and validation of the EXACT-U to report utilities for COPD exacerbations: a comparison of statistical inference and multi-attribute utility theory methods. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK (2011).
49. Stevens K, McCabe C, Brazier J, Roberts J. Multi-attribute utility function or statistical inference models: a comparison of health state valuation models using the HUI2 health state classification system. J. Health Econ. 26(5), 992-1002 (2007). (Pubitemid 47239111)
50. Nord E, Daniels N, Kamlet M. QALYs: some challenges. Value Health 12(Suppl. 1), S10-S15 (2009).
51. Weinstein MC, Torrance G, McGuire A. QALYs: the basics. Value Health 12(Suppl. 1), S5-S9 (2009).
52. Schackman BR, Teixeira PA, Weitzman G, Mushlin AI, Jacobson IM. Quality-of-life tradeoffs for hepatitis C treatment: do patients and providers agree? Med. Decis. Making 28(2), 233-242 (2008). (Pubitemid 351441944)
53. Goldberg JH. Being there is important, but getting there matters too: the role of path in the valuation process. Med. Decis. Making 26(4), 323-337 (2006). (Pubitemid 44050838)
54. Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Salomon JA, Tsuchiya A. Measuring and Valuing Health Benefits for Economic Evaluation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (2007).
55. Fowler FJ Jr, Cleary PD, Massagli MP, Weissman J, Epstein A. The role of reluctance to give up life in the measurement of the values of health states. Med. Decis. Making 15(3), 195-200 (1995).
56. Happich M, Moock J, von Lengerke T. Health state valuation methods and reference points: the case of tinnitus. Value Health 12(1), 88-95 (2009).
57. Kolominsky-Rabas PL, Caro JJ. The Hanover consensus: helpful for German decision-makers? Value Health 11(4), 545-546, discussion 547-548 (2008). (Pubitemid 352032823)
58. Lipscomb J, Drummond M, Fryback D, Gold M, Revicki D. Retaining, and enhancing, the QALY. Value Health 12(Suppl. 1), S18-S26 (2009)