Quality of life after cerebrovascular stroke: a systematic study of patients’ preferences for different functional outcomes

Hallan, Stein; Åsberg, Arne; Indredavik, Bent; Widerøe, Tor Erik

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2796.1999.00531.x

Cited by 77 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Assuming that self-managed and physicianmanaged patients began with a utility weighting of 0.7 resulted in 0.063 QALYs gained and increased the ICER to $15 698. Hallan and associates 37 reported SG estimates of 0.91 and 0.61 for minor and major stroke. Using these as utility weightings for stroke resulted in an ICER of $18 314 per QALY gained.…”

Section: Deterministic Sensitivity Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effectiveness of self-managed versus physician-managed oral anticoagulation therapy

Regier

Sunderji²,

Lynd³

et al. 2006

Canadian Medical Association Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResearchL ong-term oral anticoagulation therapy with vitamin K antagonists is prescribed as prophylaxis against strokes and other embolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation or a mechanical heart valve. 1,2 Warfarin therapy, however, is complicated by the variability of its biologic effect, its narrow therapeutic index, and the associated thrombotic or hemorrhagic events in the event of over-or underanticoagulation. 2 It has been shown that improved anticoagulant control can be achieved through frequent monitoring of the international normalized ratio (INR), resulting in improved health outcomes. 3 Monitoring the INR and managing warfarin dosing by a primary care physician is the current clinical standard of practice in Canada. 4 Physician management requires patients to visit a laboratory regularly for INR testing. The laboratory reports the INR to the physician, who subsequently contacts the patient with any required change in dosage. An alternative strategy is patient self-management. Self-management entails the measurement of the INR by the patient using a pointof-care device and, when necessary, self-adjustment of the warfarin dose using a nomogram. 4 Several published trials have compared self-management with physician management or management in an anticoagulation clinic. 4-13 It has been found that patients who self-manage check their INR more frequently and are able to maintain a greater proportion of INRs within the therapeutic range compared with those whose therapy is monitored by a physician or in an anticoagulation clinic. [11][12][13] The results of a recent meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in thromboembolic events (odds ratio [OR] 0.45), major hemorrhagic events (OR 0.65) and all-cause mortality (OR 0.61) for those using a self-management or self-test strategy. 14 The results also showed that self-management compared with self-testing alone reduces the occurrence of thromboembolic events (OR 0.27) and death (OR 0.37). 14 These results, together with the greater initial costs of educating patients to self-manage and of the pointof-care device itself, provide the impetus for a formal costeffectiveness analysis.The objective of this study was to evaluate the incremental cost and health benefits of self-managed versus physicianmanaged chronic oral anticoagulation therapy from the perspective of the Canadian health care payer. A Bayesian approach was adopted to facilitate the incorporation of prior knowledge of transition probabilities and for probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Cost-effectiveness of self-managed versus physician-managed oral anticoagulation therapy Background: Patient self-management of long-term oral anticoagulation therapy is an effective strategy in a number of clinical situations, but it is currently not a funded option in the Canadian health care system. We sought to compare the incremental cost and health benefits of self-management with those of physician management from the perspective of the Canadian health care payer over a 5-year period.

show abstract

Section: Deterministic Sensitivity Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effectiveness of self-managed versus physician-managed oral anticoagulation therapy

Regier

Sunderji²,

Lynd³

et al. 2006

Canadian Medical Association Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the utility values applied to the states 'post minor' and 'post major stroke' in TA256, were derived from a Norwegian study where values were elicited directly from participants and the general population. 127 Alternative values were identified for these states based on the EQ-5D responses of stroke people in the UK. Dorman and colleagues 128 used the EQ-5D to measure the health status of 867 people enrolled in the International Stroke Trial.…”

Section: Health Measurement and Valuationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of point-of-care tests (CoaguChek system, INRatio2 PT/INR monitor and ProTime Microcoagulation system) for the self-monitoring of the coagulation status of people receiving long-term vitamin K antagonist therapy, compared with standard UK practice: systematic review and economic evaluation

Sharma

Scotland

Cruickshank

et al. 2015

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: nihredit@southampton.ac.ukThe full HTA archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hta. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Health Technology Assessment journalReports are published in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) if (1) they have resulted from work for the HTA programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors.Reviews in Health Technology Assessment are termed 'systematic' when the account of the search appraisal and synthesis methods (to minimise biases and random errors) would, in theory, permit the replication of the review by others. HTA programmeThe HTA programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was set up in 1993. It produces high-quality research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS. 'Health technologies' are broadly defined as all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care.The journal is indexed in NHS Evidence via its abstracts included in MEDLINE and its Technology Assessment Reports inform National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance. HTA research is also an important source of evidence for National Screening Committee (NSC) policy decisions.For more information about the HTA programme please visit the website: http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hta This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was commissioned and funded by the HTA programme on behalf of NICE as project number 13/06/01. The protocol was agreed in June 2013. The assessment report began editorial review in December 2013 and was accepted for publication in March 2014. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HTA editors and publisher have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the draft document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HTA programme or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HTA programme or the Departm...

show abstract

“…After a TIA or carotid endarterectomy, we assumed that patients had a utility of 0.88, which is similar to the mean utility in the general population of the same age ( 26 ). We estimated the utility after a minor stroke (0.71) from the literature, and we used a utility of 0.31 for after a major stroke ( Table 3 ) ( 7,22,23 ). We also included disutilities for the events: For a TIA, we used a disutility of 0.0017, which we calculated in the same way as Buskens et al ( 3 ).…”

Section: Quality Of Lifementioning

confidence: 99%

Suspected Carotid Artery Stenosis: Cost-effectiveness of CT Angiography in Work-up of Patients with Recent TIA or Minor Ischemic Stroke

Tholen¹,

Monyé²,

Genders³

et al. 2010

Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality of life after cerebrovascular stroke: a systematic study of patients’ preferences for different functional outcomes

Cited by 77 publications

References 27 publications

Cost-effectiveness of self-managed versus physician-managed oral anticoagulation therapy

Cost-effectiveness of self-managed versus physician-managed oral anticoagulation therapy

Suspected Carotid Artery Stenosis: Cost-effectiveness of CT Angiography in Work-up of Patients with Recent TIA or Minor Ischemic Stroke

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About