IMPACT OF THE RECALL PERIOD ON MEASURING HEALTH UTILITIES FOR ACUTE EVENTS

被引:24
作者
Bansback, Nick [2 ]
Sun, Huiying [2 ]
Guh, Daphne P. [2 ]
Li, Xin [1 ,2 ]
Nosyk, Bohdan [2 ]
Griffin, Susan [3 ]
Barnett, Paul G. [4 ]
Anis, Aslam H. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ British Columbia, Fac Med, Dept Hlth Care & Epidemiol, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada
[2] St Pauls Hosp, Ctr Hlth Evaluat & Outcome Sci, Vancouver, BC V6Z 1Y6, Canada
[3] Univ York, Ctr Hlth Econ, York YO10 5DD, N Yorkshire, England
[4] Stanford Univ, Sch Med, Dept Hlth Res & Policy, VA Hlth Econ Resource Ctr, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
health utilities; recall;
D O I
10.1002/hec.1351
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The impact of healthcare interventions on health utility values is most frequently measured using a preference-based instrument. Each of the available instruments instructs the respondent to report their health status over different recall periods ranging from the current day to the past month. In an ongoing randomised controlled trial in patients with advanced HIV disease, the impact of using a preference-based instrument with a I-week recall period vs a I day recall period (e.g. today) for capturing recently resolved serious adverse events was measured. The results suggest that the instrument with a 1-week recall period gave lower utility values for recently resolved events in comparison with the instrument with a 1-day recall period. A plausible interpretation of these results is that the recall period was adhered to; for example, patients ignored the impact of recently resolved events in their response if the questionnaire asked them only about their health today. While there are limitations to our Study, we believe further consideration should be given to the recall period used for preference-based instruments, and future research should examine other patient groups using a single instrument With Multiple recall periods. Copyright (D 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:1413 / 1419
页数:7
相关论文
共 21 条
[11]   An open-label randomized clinical trial of novel therapeutic strategies for HIV-infected patients in whom antiretroviral therapy has failed: rationale and design of the OPTIMA Trial [J].
Kyriakides, TC ;
Babiker, A ;
Singer, J ;
Cameron, W ;
Schechter, MT ;
Holodniy, M ;
Brown, ST ;
Youle, M ;
Gazzard, B .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 2003, 24 (04) :481-500
[12]   Accuracy of recall in health-related quality-of-life assessment among men treated for prostate cancer [J].
Litwin, MS ;
McGuigan, KA .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1999, 17 (09) :2882-2888
[13]   Self-reported health status of the general adult US population as assessed by the EQ-5D and Health Utilities Index [J].
Luo, N ;
Johnson, JA ;
Shaw, JW ;
Feeny, D ;
Coons, SJ .
MEDICAL CARE, 2005, 43 (11) :1078-1086
[14]   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 [J].
Marra, CA ;
Woolcott, JC ;
Kopec, JA ;
Shojania, K ;
Offer, R ;
Brazier, JE ;
Esdaile, JM ;
Anis, AH .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2005, 60 (07) :1571-1582
[15]   NATURAL AND QUASI-EXPERIMENTS IN ECONOMICS [J].
MEYER, BD .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & ECONOMIC STATISTICS, 1995, 13 (02) :151-161
[16]   Methodological approaches for assessing response shift in longitudinal health-related quality-of-life research [J].
Schwartz, CE ;
Sprangers, MAG .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 1999, 48 (11) :1531-1548
[17]   US valuation of the EQ-5D health states - Development and testing of the D1 valuation model [J].
Shaw, JW ;
Johnson, JA ;
Coons, SJ .
MEDICAL CARE, 2005, 43 (03) :203-220
[18]   Responsiveness of generic health-related quality of life measures in stroke [J].
Simon Pickard, A ;
Johnson, JA ;
Feeny, DH .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2005, 14 (01) :207-219
[19]   APPLICATION OF MULTI-ATTRIBUTE UTILITY-THEORY TO MEASURE SOCIAL PREFERENCES FOR HEALTH STATES [J].
TORRANCE, GW ;
BOYLE, MH ;
HORWOOD, SP .
OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 1982, 30 (06) :1043-1069
[20]   MULTIATTRIBUTE PREFERENCE FUNCTIONS - HEALTH UTILITIES INDEX [J].
TORRANCE, GW ;
FURLONG, W ;
FEENY, D ;
BOYLE, M .
PHARMACOECONOMICS, 1995, 7 (06) :503-520