Baseline comparison of three health utility measures and the feeling thermometer among participants in the action to control cardiovascular risk in diabetes trial

Cardiovascular Diabetology

Volumn 11, Issue , 2012, Pages

  Raisch, Dennis W ^a,b   Feeney, Patricia ^c   Goff, David C ^c   Narayan, KM V ^d   O'Connor, Patrick J ^e   Zhang, Ping ^f   Hire, Don G ^c   Sullivan, Mark D ^g  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER   (United States)

^b University of New Mexico   (United States)

^c WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

^d EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e HEALTHPARTNERS RESEARCH FOUNDATION   (United States)

^f NATIONAL CENTER FOR CHRONIC DISEASE PREVENTION AND HEALTH PROMOTION   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

complications physiopathology psychology; Diabetes mellitus, type 2 ; Glycemic control; Health status indicators; Humans; Randomized controlled clinical trial; Regression analysis

Indexed keywords

CHOLESTEROL; HIGH DENSITY LIPOPROTEIN; LOW DENSITY LIPOPROTEIN; TRIACYLGLYCEROL;

ADULT; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BLOOD GLUCOSE MONITORING; BLOOD PRESSURE REGULATION; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEELING THERMOMETER; FEMALE; HEALTH UTILITIES INDEX II; HEALTH UTILITIES INDEX III; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NON INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; QUALITY OF LIFE; RATING SCALE; RISK MANAGEMENT; SCORING SYSTEM; SHORT FORM 6 DIMENSIONS; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; AGED; CANADA; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIABETES MELLITUS; EMOTION; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEY; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; UNITED STATES;

AGED; CANADA; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; DIABETES COMPLICATIONS; DIABETES MELLITUS, TYPE 2; EMOTIONS; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84863744704     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14752840     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1475-2840-11-35     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Green C, Brazier J, Deverill M. Valuing health-related quality of life. A review of health state valuation techniques. Pharmacoeconomics 2000, 17(2):151-165. 10.2165/00019053-200017020-00004, 10947338.
2. Valentine WJ, Bottomley JM, Palmer AJ, Brandle M, Foos V, Williams R, Dormandy JA, Yates J, Tan MH, Massi-Benedetti M. PROactive 06: cost-effectiveness of pioglitazone in Type 2 diabetes in the UK. Diabet Med 2007, 24(9):982-1002. 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2007.02188.x, 17593245.
3. Feeny D, Furlong W, Boyle M, Torrance GW. Multi-attribute health status classification systems, Health Utilities Index. Pharmacoeconomics 1995, 7(6):490-502. 10.2165/00019053-199507060-00004, 10155335.
4. Kind P, Dolan P, Gudex C, Williams A. Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. BMJ 1998, 316(7133):736-741. 10.1136/bmj.316.7133.736, 28477, 9529408.
5. Brazier JE, Roberts J. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Med Care 2004, 42(9):851-859. 10.1097/01.mlr.0000135827.18610.0d, 15319610.
6. Schunemann HJ, Armstrong D, Degl'innocenti A, Wiklund I, Fallone CA, Tanser L, Van Zanten SV, Heels-Ansdell D, El-Dika S, Chiba N, et al. A randomized multicenter trial to evaluate simple utility elicitation techniques in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Med Care 2004, 42(11):1132-1142. 10.1097/00005650-200411000-00013, 15586841.
7. Schunemann HJ, Griffith L, Stubbing D, Goldstein R, Guyatt GH. A clinical trial to evaluate the measurement properties of 2 direct preference instruments administered with and without hypothetical marker states. Med Decis Making 2003, 23(2):140-149. 10.1177/0272989X03251243, 12693876.
8. Rasanen P, Roine E, Sintonen H, Semberg-Konttinen V, Ryynanen OP, Roine R. Use of quality-adjusted life years for the estimation of effectiveness of health care: A systematic literature review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2006, 22(2):235-241.
9. Brazier J, Green C, McCabe C, Stevens K. Use of visual analog scales in economic evaluation. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2003, 3(3):293-302. 10.1586/14737167.3.3.293, 19807377.
10. Harrison MJ, Bansback NJ, Marra CA, Drummond M, Tugwell PS, Boonen A. Valuing health for clinical and economic decisions: directions relevant for rheumatologists. J Rheumatol 2011, 38(8):1770-1775. 10.3899/jrheum.110404, 21807800.
11. Parkin D, Devlin N. Is there a case for using visual analogue scale valuations in cost-utility analysis?. Health Econ 2006, 15(7):653-664. 10.1002/hec.1086, 16498700.
12. 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(4):329-334.
13. Rashidi AA, Anis AH, Marra CA. Do visual analogue scale (VAS) derived standard gamble (SG) utilities agree with Health Utilities Index utilities? A comparison of patient and community preferences for health status in rheumatoid arthritis patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006, 4:25. 10.1186/1477-7525-4-25, 1553436, 16626489.
14. Hatoum HT, Brazier JE, Akhras KS. Comparison of the HUI3 with the SF-36 preference based SF-6D in a clinical trial setting. Value Health 2004, 7(5):602-609. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2004.75011.x, 15367255.
15. 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(10):1659-1670. 10.1007/s11136-004-6189-2, 15651537.
16. Barton GR, Bankart J, Davis AC, Summerfield QA. Comparing Utility Scores Before and After Hearing-Aid Provision : Results According to the EQ-5D, HUI3 and SF-6D. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2004, 3(2):103-105. 10.2165/00148365-200403020-00006, 15702947.
17. O'Brien BJ, Spath M, Blackhouse G, Severens JL, Dorian P, Brazier J. A view from the bridge: agreement between the SF-6D utility algorithm and the Health Utilities Index. Health Econ 2003, 12(11):975-981. 10.1002/hec.789, 14601159.
18. Huang ES, Shook M, Jin L, Chin MH, Meltzer DO. The impact of patient preferences on the cost-effectiveness of intensive glucose control in older patients with new-onset diabetes. Diabetes Care 2006, 29(2):259-264. 10.2337/diacare.29.02.06.dc05-1443, 2292131, 16443870.
19. Franks P, Hanmer J, Fryback DG. Relative disutilities of 47 risk factors and conditions assessed with seven preference-based health status measures in a national U.S. sample: toward consistency in cost-effectiveness analyses. Med Care 2006, 44(5)):478-485.
20. Pickard AS, Wang Z, Walton SM, Lee TA. Are decisions using cost-utility analyses robust to choice of SF-36/SF-12 preference-based algorithm?. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2005, 3:11. 10.1186/1477-7525-3-11, 555748, 15748287.
21. Smith KJ, Hsu HE, Roberts MS, Kramer MK, Orchard TJ, Piatt GA, Seidel MC, Zgibor JC, Bryce CL. Cost-effectiveness analysis of efforts to reduce risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease in southwestern Pennsylvania, 2005-2007. Prev Chronic Dis 2010, 7(5):A109. 2938403, 20712936.
22. Maddigan SL, Feeny DH, Majumdar SR, Farris KB, Johnson JA. Health Utilities Index mark 3 demonstrated construct validity in a population-based sample with type 2 diabetes. J Clin Epidemiol 2006, 59(5):472-477. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.09.010, 16632135.
23. Mo F, Morrison H, Choi BC, Vardy L. Evaluation and measurement of health-related quality of life for individuals with diabetes mellitus by Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) system. ScientificWorldJournal 2006, 6:1412-1423.
24. Maddigan SL, Feeny DH, Johnson JA. A comparison of the health utilities indices Mark 2 and Mark 3 in type 2 diabetes. Med Decis Making 2003, 23(6):489-501. 10.1177/0272989X03258438, 14672109.
25. Barton GR, Sach TH, Doherty M, Avery AJ, Jenkinson C, Muir KR. An assessment of the discriminative ability of the EQ-5Dindex, SF-6D, and EQ VAS, using sociodemographic factors and clinical conditions. Eur J Health Econ 2008, 9(3):237-249. 10.1007/s10198-007-0068-z, 17605057.
26. Ackermann RT, Edelstein SL, Venkat Narayan KM, Zhang P, Engelgau MM, Herman WH, Marrero DG. Changes in Health State Utilities With Changes in Body Mass in the Diabetes Prevention Program. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2009, 17(12):2176-2181.
27. Sach TH, Barton GR, Doherty M, Muir KR, Jenkinson C, Avery AJ. The relationship between body mass index and health-related quality of life: comparing the EQ-5D, EuroQol VAS and SF-6D. Int J Obes (Lond) 2007, 31(1):189-196.
28. Buse JB, Bigger JT, Byington RP, Cooper LS, Cushman WC, Friedewald WT, Genuth S, Gerstein HC, Ginsberg HN, Goff DC, et al. Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial: design and methods. Am J Cardiol 2007, 99(12A)):21i-33i.
29. Gerstein HC, Miller ME, Byington RP, Goff DC, Bigger JT, Buse JB, Cushman WC, Genuth S, Ismail-Beigi F, Grimm RH, et al. Effects of intensive glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2008, 358(24):2545-2559.
30. Sullivan MD, Anderson RT, Aron D, Atkinson HH, Bastien A, Chen GJ, Feeney P, Gafni A, Hwang W, Katz LA, et al. Health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness components of the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial: rationale and design. Am J Cardiol 2007, 99(12A)):90i-102i.
31. Williamson JD, Miller ME, Bryan RN, Lazar RM, Coker LH, Johnson J, Cukierman T, Horowitz KR, Murray A, Launer LJ. The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Memory in Diabetes Study (ACCORD-MIND): rationale, design, and methods. Am J Cardiol 2007, 99(12A)):112i-122i.
32. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002, 21(2):271-292. 10.1016/S0167-6296(01)00130-8, 11939242.
33. McGraw K, Wong S. Forming inferences about some Intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods 1996, 1:30-48.
34. O'Reilly DJ, Xie F, Pullenayegum E, Gerstein HC, Greb J, Blackhouse GK, Tarride JE, Bowen J, Goeree RA. Estimation of the impact of diabetes-related complications on health utilities for patients with type 2 diabetes in Ontario, Canada. Qual Life Res 2011, 20(6):939-943. 10.1007/s11136-010-9828-9, 21221816.
35. Glasziou P, Alexander J, Beller E, Clarke P. Which health-related quality of life score? A comparison of alternative utility measures in patients with Type 2 diabetes in the ADVANCE trial. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2007, 5:21. 10.1186/1477-7525-5-21, 1950473, 17462100.
36. Clarke P, Gray A, Holman R. Estimating utility values for health states of type 2 diabetic patients using the EQ-5D (UKPDS 62). Med Decis Making 2002, 22(4):340-349.
37. Bagust A, Beale S. Modelling EuroQol health-related utility values for diabetic complications from CODE-2 data. Health Econ 2005, 14(3):217-230. 10.1002/hec.910, 15386666.
38. Matza LS, Boye KS, Yurgin N, Brewster-Jordan J, Mannix S, Shorr JM, Barber BL. Utilities and disutilities for type 2 diabetes treatment-related attributes. Qual Life Res 2007, 16(7):1251-1265. 10.1007/s11136-007-9226-0, 17638121.
39. Kaplan RM. The minimally clinically important difference in generic utility-based measures. COPD 2005, 2(1):91-97. 10.1081/COPD-200052090, 17136968.
40. Robinson A, Loomes G, Jones-Lee M. Visual analog scales, standard gambles, and relative risk aversion. Med Decis Making 2001, 21(1):17-27. 10.1177/0272989X0102100103, 11206943.
41. Tsuchiya A, Brazier J, Roberts J. Comparison of valuation methods used to generate the EQ-5D and the SF-6D value sets. J Health Econ 2005, 25(2):334-346.
42. Xie F, Li SC, Luo N, Lo NN, Yeo SJ, Yang KY, Fong KY, Thumboo J. Comparison of the EuroQol and short form 6D in Singapore multiethnic Asian knee osteoarthritis patients scheduled for total knee replacement. Arthritis Rheum 2007, 57(6):1043-1049. 10.1002/art.22883, 17665466.
43. Marra CA, Woolcott JC, Kopec JA, Shojania K, Offer R, Brazier JE, Esdaile JM, Anis AH. A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis. Soc Sci Med 2005, 60(7):1571-1582. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.08.034, 15652688.
44. Wee HL, Machin D, Loke WC, Li SC, Cheung YB, Luo N, Feeny D, Fong KY, Thumboo J. Assessing differences in utility scores: a comparison of four widely used preference-based instruments. Value Health 2007, 10(4):256-265. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00174.x, 17645680.
45. Lloyd A, Sawyer W, Hopkinson P. Impact of long-term complications on quality of life in patients with type 2 diabetes not using insulin. Value Health 2001, 4(5):392-400. 10.1046/j.1524-4733.2001.45029.x, 11705130.
46. Dennett SL, Boye KS, Yurgin NR. The impact of body weight on patient utilities with or without type 2 diabetes: a review of the medical literature. Value Health 2008, 11(3):478-486. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00260.x, 18489671.
47. Hayes AJ, Clarke PM, Voysey M, Keech A. Simulation of quality-adjusted survival in chronic diseases: an application in type 2 diabetes. Med Decis Making 2011, 31(4):559-570. 10.1177/0272989X11409049, 21636740.
48. Belletti DA, Zacker C, Wogen J. Effect of cardiometabolic risk factors on hypertension management: a cross-sectional study among 28 physician practices in the United States. Cardiovasc Diabetol 2010, 9:7. 10.1186/1475-2840-9-7, 2824690, 20122170.
49. Kuznik A, Mardekian J. Trends in utilization of lipid- and blood pressure-lowering agents and goal attainment among the U.S. diabetic population, 1999-2008. Cardiovasc Diabetol 2011, 10:31. 10.1186/1475-2840-10-31, 3098774, 21496321.
50. Norgaard ML, Andersson C, Hansen PR, Andersen SS, Vaag A, Schramm TK, Folke F, Kober L, Torp-Pedersen C, Gislason GH. Temporal trends in the initiation of glucose-lowering medications after a first-time myocardial infarction - a nationwide study between 1997 and 2006. Cardiovasc Diabetol 2011, 10:5. 10.1186/1475-2840-10-5, 3031215, 21247456.
51. Rahman M, Simmons RK, Hennings SH, Wareham NJ, Griffin SJ. Effect of screening for Type 2 diabetes on population-level self-rated health outcomes and measures of cardiovascular risk: 13-year follow-up of the Ely cohort. Diabet Med 2012, 28.