Quality-of-life loss of people admitted to burn centers, United States

Quality of Life Research

Volumn 22, Issue 9, 2013, Pages 2293-2305

  Miller, Ted ^a   Bhattacharya, Soma ^a   Zamula, William ^b   Lezotte, Dennis ^c   Kowalske, Karen ^d   Herndon, David ^e   Fauerbach, James ^f   Engrav, Loren ^g  

^a PACIFIC INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND EVALUATION   (United States)

^b US Consumer Product Safety Commission   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL BRANCH   (United States)

^f JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Burn; EQ 5d; QALY; SF 12; Systematic review of scorings

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BURN; BURN UNIT; CHILD; FEMALE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; STATISTICS; SURVIVOR; TIME; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; BURN UNITS; BURNS; CHILD; FEMALE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMANS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; QUESTIONNAIRES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURVIVORS; TIME FACTORS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84892819795     PISSN: 09629343     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-012-0321-5     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. Whitehead, S., & Ali, S. (2010). Health outcomes in economic evaluation: The QALY and utilities. British Medical Bulletin, 96(1), 5-21.
2. Sanchez, J.-L. A., Pereperez, S. B., Bastida, J. L., & Martinez, M. M. (2007). Cost-utility analysis applied to the treatment of burn patients in a specialized center. Archives of Surgery, 142(1), 50-57.
3. Oster, C., Willebrand, M., Dyster-Aas, J., Kildal, M., & Ekselius, L. (2009). Validation of the EQ-5d questionnaire in burn-injured adults. Burns, 35(5), 723-732.
4. Polinder, S., van Beeck, E. F., Essink-Bot, M. L., Toet, H., Looman, C. W. N., et al. (2007). Functional outcome at 2.5, 5, 9, and 24 months after injury in the Netherlands. Journal of Trauma Nursing, 62(1), 133-141.
5. Dolan, P. (1997). Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Medical Care, 35(11), 1095-1108.
6. Ware, J. J. E., Kosinski, M., Turner-Bowker, D. M., & Gandek, B. (2002). How to score version 2 of the SF-12 health survey (with a supplement documenting version 1). Lincoln, RI: Quality Metric Incorporated.
7. Turner-Bowker, D. M., Bayliss, M. S., Kosinski, M., Zhao, J., & Saris-Baglama, R. N. (2003). SF-10 for childrenTM,a user's guide. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Inc.
8. HealthActCHQ. (2008). Child health questionnaire scoring and interpretation manual. Cambridge MA: HealthActCHQ Inc.
9. McHorney, C., Ware, J., Rogers, W., Raczek, A. E., Lu, J. F., et al. (1992). The validity and relative precision of MOS shortand long-form health status scales and Dartmouth COOP charts: Results from the Medical Outcomes Study. Medical Care, 30(5), MS253-MS265.
10. Schofield, M., & Mishra, G. (1998). Validity of the SF-12 compared with the SF-36 Health Survey in pilot studies of the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health. Journal of Health Psychology, 3, 259-271.
11. Gray, A., Rivero-Arias, O., & Clarke, P. (2006). Estimating the association between SF-12 reponses and EQ-5D utility values by response mapping. Medical Decision Making, 26, 18-29.
12. Econsys. (2008). A study of compensation payments for serviceconnected disabilities: Earnings and quality of life loss analysis (Vol. III). Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.
13. Grenier, W., Weijnen, T., Nieuwenhuizen, M., Oppe, S., Badia, X., et al. (2003). A single European currency for EQ-5D health states: Results from a six-country study. The European Journal of Health Economics, 4(3), 222-231.
14. Sengupta, N., Nichol, M. B., Wu, J., & Globe, D. (2004). Mapping the SF-12 to the HU13 and VAS in a managed care population. Medical Care, 42(9), 927-937.
15. Mortimer, D., & Segal, L. (2008). Comparing the incomparable? A systematic review of competing techniques for converting descriptive measures of health status into QALY-weights. Medical Decision Making, 28, 66-89.
16. Lundberg, L., Johannesson, M., Isacson, D. G. I., & Borgquist, L. (1999). The relationship between health-state utilities and the SF-12 in a general population. Medical Decision Making, 19, 128-140.
17. Shmueli, A. (1999). Subjective health status and health values in the general population. Medical Decision Making, 19, 122-127.
18. Brazier, J. E., & Roberts, J. (2004). The estimation of a preference- based measure of health from the SF-12. Medical Care, 42(9), 851-859.
19. Fryback, D. G., Lawrence, W. F., Martin, P. A., Klein, R., & Klein, B. E. (1997). Predicting quality of well-being scores from the SF-36: Results from the Beaver Dam Health Outcomes Study. Medical Decision Making, 17, 1-9.
20. Sullivan, P., & Ghushchyan, V. (2006). Mapping the EQ-5D index from the SF-12: U.S. general population preferences in a nationally representive sample. Medical Decision Making, 26, 401-409.
21. Bult, J. R., Bosch, J., & Hunink, M. (1996). Heterogeneity in the relationship between the standary-gamble utility measure and health-status dimensions. Medical Decision Making, 16, 226-233.
22. Bult, J. R., Hunick, G. M., Tsevat, J., & Weinstein, M. C. (1998). Heterogeneity in the relationship between the time tradeoff and short form-36 for HIV-infected and primary care patients. Medical Care, 36, 523-532.
23. Wittrup-Jensen, K. U., & Pedersen, K. M. (2008). Estimation of a preference-based index measure of health for SF-12 by applying multi-attribute utility theory (MAUT) - an experiment: University of Southern Denmark. http://www.sam.sdu.dk/healtheco/ publications/20088.pdf. Accessed April 14, 2008.
24. Drummond, M. F., O'Brien, B., Stoddart, G. L., & Torrance, G. W. (1997). Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Greene, W. H. (2008). Econometric analysis (6th ed.). New Jersey, NJ: Pearson Education/Prentice Hall.
26. Ray, D. R., Zamula, W. W., Miller, T. R., Brigham, P., Cohen, M., Douglass, J., Galbraith, M., et al. (1993). Estimating the costs to society of cigarette fire injuries. Report to Congress in response to the Fire Safe Cigarette Act of 1990 (Vol. 6). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office and Consumer Product Safety Commission.
27. Ewing, J. A. (1984). Detecting alcoholism: The CAGE questionnaire. Journal of the American Medical Association, 252, 1905-1907.
28. Walters, S. J., & Brazier, J. E. (2005). Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Quality of Life Research, 14(6), 1523-1532.
29. Farivar, S. S., Liu, H., & Hays, R. D. (2004). Half standard deviation estimate of the minimum important difference in HRQOL scores? Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 4(5), 515-523.
30. Franks, P., Lubetkin, E., Gold, M., Tancredi, D., & Jia, H. (2004). Mapping the SF-12 to the EuroQol EQ-5D index in a national U.S. sample. Medical Decision Making, 24, 247-254.
31. Franks, P., Lubetkin, E., Gold, M., & Tancredi, D. (2003). Mapping the SF-12 to preference-based instruments convergent validity in a low-income, minority population. Medical Care, 41(11), 1277-1283.
32. Lawrence, W., & Fleishman, J. (2004). Predicting EuroQol EQ- 5D preference scores from the SF-12 health survey in a nationally representive sample. Medical Decision Making, 24, 160-169.
33. Nichols, M. B., Sengupta, N., & Globe, D. (2001). Evaluating quality-adjusted life years: Estimation of the Health Utility Index (HU12) from the SF-36. Medical Decision Making, 21, 105-112.
34. Shmueli, A. (2004). The relationship between the visual analog scale and the SF-36 scales in the general population: An update. Medical Decision Making, 24(1), 61-63.
35. Stratmann-Schoene, D., Kuehn, T., Kreienberg, R., & Leidl, R. (2006). A preference-based index for the SF-12. Health Economics, 15(6), 553-564.
36. Badia, X., Schiaffino, A., Alonso, J., & Herdman, M. (1998). Using the EuroQol 5-D in the Catalan general population: Feasibility and construct validity. Quality of Life Research, 7(4), 311-322.
37. Cleemput, I., Kesteloot, K., Moons, P., Vanrenterghem, Y., Van Hooff, J., et al. (2004). The construct and concurrent validity of the EQ-5D in a renal transplant population. Value in Health, 7(4), 499-509.
38. EuroQol Group. (2007). EQ-5D value sets: Inventory, comparative review and user guide. The Netherlands: Springer.
39. Jelsma, J., Hansen, K., Weerdt, W., de Cock, P., & Kind, P. (2003). How do Zimbabweans value health states? Population Health Metrics, 1(1), 11.
40. Johnson, J., & Coons, S. (1998). Comparison of the EuroQol and the SF-12 in an adult US sample. Quality of Life Research, 7, 155-166.
41. Lamers, L. M., McDonnell, J., Stalmeier, P. F. M., Krabbe, P. F. M., & Busschbach, J. J. V. (2006). The Dutch tariff: results and arguments for an effective design for national EQ-5D valuation studies. Health Economics Letters, 15(10), 1121-1132.
42. Shaw, J., Johnson, J., & Coons, S. J. (2005). U.S. valuation of the EQ-5D health states development and testing of the D1 valuation model. Medical Care, 43(3), 203-220.
43. Tsuchiya, A., Ikeda, S., Ikegami, N., Nishimura, S., Sakai, I., et al. (2002). Estimating an EQ-5D populating value set: The case of Japan. Health Economics, 11(4), 341-353.
44. Hakim, Z., & Pathak, D. S. (1999). Modelling the EuroQol data: A comparison of discrete choice conjoint and conditional preference modeling. Health Economics, 8, 103-116.