To What Extent Do Patient Preferences Differ From General Population Preferences?

Ludwig, Kristina; Ramos-Goñi, Juan Manuel; Oppe, Mark; Kreimeier, Simone; Greiner, Wolfgang

doi:10.1016/j.jval.2021.02.012

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings suggest that potential future value sets for the OxCAP-MH elicited from the general population are likely to represent well also the direct preferences of people with lived experience of mental ill-health. These results somewhat contradict the findings that patient preferences differ from preferences derived from the general population for the EQ-5D-5L items [ 10 ]. In the study by Ludwig et al, 2021, patients in the EQ-5D-5L study gave more importance to mobility, self-care, or usual activities and less importance to pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression compared to the general population [ 10 ].…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 80%

“…These results somewhat contradict the findings that patient preferences differ from preferences derived from the general population for the EQ-5D-5L items [ 10 ]. In the study by Ludwig et al, 2021, patients in the EQ-5D-5L study gave more importance to mobility, self-care, or usual activities and less importance to pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression compared to the general population [ 10 ]. The differential findings between the two studies could be explained by the specific perception of mental health itself and the difference between health-related quality of life and capabilities as evaluative spaces.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 80%

“…regions/countries) and main sociodemographic characteristics (i.e. age, gender), but also across different cohorts influenced by specific insight into or adaptation to an illness [ 8 – 10 ]. It has long been acknowledged in the preference elicitation and value weighting literature that the time spent in a health state may have an influence on the way that state is perceived too [ 11 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Does the relative importance of the OxCAP-MH’s capability items differ according to mental ill-health experience?

Helter

Kaltenboeck

Baumgärtner

et al. 2022

Health Qual Life Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Some capability dimensions may be more important than others in determining someone’s well-being, and these preferences might be dependent on ill-health experience. This study aimed to explore the relative preference weights of the 16 items of the German language version of the OxCAP-MH (Oxford Capability questionnaire-Mental Health) capability instrument and their differences across cohorts with alternative levels of mental ill-health experience. Methods A Best–Worst-Scaling (BWS) survey was conducted in Austria among 1) psychiatric patients (direct mental ill-health experience), 2) (mental) healthcare experts (indirect mental ill-health experience), and 3) primary care patients with no mental ill-health experience. Relative importance scores for each item of the German OxCAP-MH instrument were calculated using Hierarchical Bayes estimation. Rank analysis and multivariable linear regression analysis with robust standard errors were used to explore the relative importance of the OxCAP-MH items across the three cohorts. Results The study included 158 participants with complete cases and acceptable fit statistic. The relative importance scores for the full cohort ranged from 0.76 to 15.72. Findings of the BWS experiment indicated that the items Self-determination and Limitation in daily activities were regarded as the most important for all three cohorts. Freedom of expression was rated significantly less important by psychiatric patients than by the other two cohorts, while Having suitable accommodation appeared significantly less important by the expert cohort. There were no further significant differences in the relative preference weights of OxCAP-MH items between the cohorts or according to gender. Conclusions Our study indicates significant between-item but limited mental ill-health related heterogeneity in the relative preference weights of the different capability items within the OxCAP-MH. The findings support the future development of preference-based value sets elicited from the general population for comparative economic evaluation purposes.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 80%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 80%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does the relative importance of the OxCAP-MH’s capability items differ according to mental ill-health experience?

Helter

Kaltenboeck

Baumgärtner

et al. 2022

Health Qual Life Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Higher utility scores are occasionally seen in patients compared to the general public. More recently, Ludwig and colleagues [ 25 ] demonstrated patient preferences that differed from general public preferences, where patients reported more concern about functional aspects than about pain and anxiety when compared to the general public. Another recent study [ 26 ] showed minimal differences in utility scores between general public and patient samples when utility scores were collected using the same health states for both groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Elicitation of Health State Utilities Associated with Progression from Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) Unresponsive Non-muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer (NMIBC)

Cooper¹,

Ghatnekar

Piglowska³

et al. 2023

PharmacoEconomics Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The treatments for high-grade non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) vary between bladder preserving intravesical approaches and radical cystectomy. The impact of these treatments on health-related quality of life may vary widely. The purpose of this study was to elicit the general public’s perspective on quality of life, measured as utility scores associated with treatment for Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG)-unresponsive NMIBC and disease progression, for supporting economic evaluation of newly developed treatments for NMIBC. Materials and Methods Part I involved the development and testing of health states describing NMIBC, which was informed by a rapid review, expert input and a patient advisor. Part II involved elicitation of societal utility values for the different health states. Time trade-off (TTO) interviews were conducted with members of the UK general public. Five health states described different NMIBC scenarios including disease recurrence and progression. Participants ranked each health state, followed by the TTO valuation exercise. Descriptors included NMIBC symptom severity, impact and treatment characteristics. Results In total, 202 members of the general public participated. The mean age was 46 (standard deviation [SD] 14.6) years. Sample mean (SD) EQ-5D-5L visual analogue scale (VAS) and index scores were 83.2 (12.3) and 0.89 (0.18), respectively. Mean utilities were 0.781 for No High-Grade Recurrence, 0.586 for High-Grade Recurrence, 0.572 for > 1-Year Post-cystectomy and 0.283 for metastatic disease. The First Year Post-cystectomy path health state had a mean utility of 0.288. Pairwise comparisons found statistically significant differences between utilities ( p < 0.001), except between High-Grade Recurrence and > 1-Year Post-cystectomy ( p = 0.524). There were significant differences in utility scores by age and employment status. Conclusion This study provides utility scores for health states describing living with NMIBC, which is associated with a significant health-related quality-of-life burden. These values address an existing gap in available data and have the potential to be used in models evaluating the cost-effectiveness of both current and newly developed treatments for bladder cancer. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41669-023-00392-4.

show abstract

“…One approach to estimating HSUV in this circumstance is the use of direct HSUV elicitation techniques, such as time trade-off, standard gamble, or discrete choice experiments. The problem with this solution is that patients have a tendency to over-value their own health state relative to opinions of the general public from whom valuation sets for indirect HSUV instruments are derived (Peeters & Stiggelbout 2010; Ludwig et al 2021). This risks inducing a ceiling effect with high HSUV estimates for the pretreatment condition and limited potential for clinically significant gain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health State Utility Values Associated with Cochlear Implants in Adults: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The cost-effectiveness of bilateral cochlear implants in adults remains uncertain despite established clinical benefits. In cost-effectiveness studies, benefit is often measured by change in health state utility value (HSUV), a single number summary of health-related quality of life anchored at 0 (state of being dead) and 1 (perfect health). Small differences in bilateral cochlear implant HSUV change conclusions of published models, and invalid estimates can therefore mislead policy and funding decisions. As such, we aimed to review and synthesize published HSUV estimates associated with cochlear implants. Design: We included observational or experimental studies reporting HSUV for adult patients (age ≥18 years) with at least moderate-profound sensorineural hearing loss in both ears who received unilateral or bilateral cochlear implants. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases up to May 1, 2021. Study and participant characteristics and HSUV outcomes were extracted. Narrative synthesis is reported for all studies. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to generate pooled estimates for the mean difference in HSUV for three comparisons: (1) unilateral cochlear implant versus preimplant, (2) bilateral cochlear implants versus preimplant, (3) bilateral versus unilateral cochlear implants. Our principal measure was pooled mean difference in HSUV. Results: Thirty-six studies reporting unique patient cohorts were identified. Health Utilities Index, 3 (HUI-3) was the most common HSUV elicitation method. HSUV from 19 preimplant mean estimates (1402 patients), 19 unilateral cochlear implant mean estimates (1701 patients), and 5 bilateral cochlear implants mean estimates (83 patients) were pooled to estimate mean differences in HUI-3 HSUV by network meta-analysis. Compared with preimplant, a unilateral cochlear implant was associated with a mean change in HSUV of +0.17 (95% credible interval [CrI] +0.12 to +0.23) and bilateral cochlear implants were associated with a mean change of +0.25 (95% CrI +0.12 to +0.37). No significant difference in HSUV was detected for bilateral compared with unilateral cochlear implants (+0.08 [95% CrI −0.06 to +0.21]). Overall study quality was moderate. Conclusions: The findings of this review and network meta-analysis comprise the best-available resource for parameterization of cost-utility models of cochlear implantation in adults and highlight the need to critically evaluate the validity of available HSUV instruments for bilateral cochlear implant populations. Protocol registration: PROSPERO (CRD42018091838)

show abstract

To What Extent Do Patient Preferences Differ From General Population Preferences?

Cited by 17 publications

References 24 publications

Does the relative importance of the OxCAP-MH’s capability items differ according to mental ill-health experience?

Does the relative importance of the OxCAP-MH’s capability items differ according to mental ill-health experience?

Elicitation of Health State Utilities Associated with Progression from Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) Unresponsive Non-muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer (NMIBC)

Health State Utility Values Associated with Cochlear Implants in Adults: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About