Assessing the empirical validity of alternative multi-attribute utility measures in the maternity context
- PDF / 617,490 Bytes
- 12 Pages / 610 x 792 pts Page_size
- 97 Downloads / 207 Views
BioMed Central
Open Access
Research
Assessing the empirical validity of alternative multi-attribute utility measures in the maternity context Stavros Petrou*1,2, Jane Morrell3 and Helen Spiby4 Address: 1National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health, University of Oxford (Old Road Campus), Oxford, UK, 2Health Economics Research Centre, Department of Public Health, University of Oxford (Old Road Campus), Oxford, UK, 3Centre for Health and Social Care Research, School of Human and Health Sciences, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, UK and 4Mother and Infant Research Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK Email: Stavros Petrou* - [email protected]; Jane Morrell - [email protected]; Helen Spiby - [email protected] * Corresponding author
Published: 6 May 2009 Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2009, 7:40
doi:10.1186/1477-7525-7-40
Received: 17 February 2009 Accepted: 6 May 2009
This article is available from: http://www.hqlo.com/content/7/1/40 © 2009 Petrou et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract Background: Multi-attribute utility measures are preference-based health-related quality of life measures that have been developed to inform economic evaluations of health care interventions. The objective of this study was to compare the empirical validity of two multi-attribute utility measures (EQ-5D and SF-6D) based on hypothetical preferences in a large maternity population in England. Methods: Women who participated in a randomised controlled trial of additional postnatal support provided by trained community support workers represented the study population for this investigation. The women were asked to complete the EQ-5D descriptive system (which defines health-related quality of life in terms of five dimensions: mobility, self care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression) and the SF-36 (which defines health-related quality of life, using 36 items, across eight dimensions: physical functioning, role limitations (physical), social functioning, bodily pain, general health, mental health, vitality and role limitations (emotional)) at six months postpartum. Their responses were converted into utility scores using the York A1 tariff set and the SF-6D utility algorithm, respectively. One-way analysis of variance was used to test the hypothetically-constructed preference rule that each set of utility scores differs significantly by self-reported health status (categorised as excellent, very good, good, fair or poor). The degree to which EQ-5D and SF-6D utility scores reflected alternative dichotomous configurations of self-reported health status and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale score was tested using the relative efficiency statistic and receiver opera
Data Loading...
