Health Related Quality of Life Among Patients with Heart Failure in South Korea

Lee, B; Kim, E; Yang, Ban Seok; Kwon, Hyun Joo

doi:10.1016/j.jval.2016.08.380

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most studies (n = 130) recruited patients with HF, of which 113 elicited data using patient-reported outcomes. One study used proxy report by caregivers (both informal and healthcare providers) [16]; six studies recruited a general population and one study used healthcare providers, and elicited utility values for vignettes describing specific health states [17][18][19][20][21][22][23]; and five cost-utility models defined hypothetical HF populations deriving utility values from the literature [24][25][26][27][28].…”

Section: Study Identification and Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health State Utilities of Patients with Heart Failure: A Systematic Literature Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives New treatments and interventions are in development to address clinical needs in heart failure. To support decision making on reimbursement, cost-effectiveness analyses are frequently required. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify and summarize heart failure utility values for use in economic evaluations. Methods Databases were searched for articles published until June 2019 that reported health utility values for patients with heart failure. Publications were reviewed with specific attention to study design; reported values were categorized according to the health states, 'chronic heart failure', 'hospitalized', and 'other acute heart failure'. Interquartile limits (25th percentile 'Q1', 75th percentile 'Q3') were calculated for health states and heart failure subgroups where there were sufficient data. Results The systematic literature review identified 161 publications based on data from 142 studies. Utility values for chronic heart failure were reported by 128 publications; 39 publications published values for hospitalized and three for other acute heart failure. There was substantial heterogeneity in the specifics of the study populations, methods of elicitation, and summary statistics, which is reflected in the wide range of utility values reported. EQ-5D was the most used instrument; the interquartile limit for mean EQ-5D values for chronic heart failure was 0.64-0.72. Conclusions There is a wealth of published utility values for heart failure to support economic evaluations. Data are heterogenous owing to specificities of the study population and methodology of utility value elicitation and analysis. Choice of value(s) to support economic models must be carefully justified to ensure a robust economic analysis.

show abstract