VALUATION OF SCHIZOPHRENIA-RELATED HEALTH STATES BY THE GENERAL POPULATION USING THE ASSESSMENT OF QUALITY OF LIFE QUESTIONNAIRE, TIME TRADE-OFF AND VISUAL ANALOGUE SCALES
Author(s)
Steve Crowley, MSC, MBA, Director - Health Economics1, Jane Adams, BA(Hons), PhD, Senior Quality of Life Analyst2, Corinne Le Reun, BA(Ec), BA(stat), Senior Statistician3, Vinita Nand, PhD, Project Manager - Health Economics4, Andrew Eggleston, BPharm, MMedSci, Associate Director - Health Economics4, Rudolf Schrover, MA, Pricing Manager/Associate Lecturer51University of Melbourne, North Ryde, NSW, Australia; 2 Medical Technology Assessment Group, Chatswood, NSW, Australia; 3 M-TAG Pty Ltd, Chatswood, Australia; 4 Janssen-Cilag Pty Ltd, North Ryde, NSW, Australia; 5 Janssen-Cilag Pty Ltd/University of Melbourne, North Ryde, NSW, Australia
OBJECTIVE:To assess differences in the valuation of eight schizophrenia-related health states using a multi-attribute utility instrument, the Assessment of Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQoL), and two scaling techniques, the time trade-off (TTO) and a visual analogue scale (VAS). METHODS: Eight schizophrenia-related health state scenarios based on severity of symptoms and medication side effects were presented to 87 participants from the general population. Scenarios were: A) ‘good' function with no movement disorders (extrapyramidal symptoms); B) ‘good' function with movement disorders; C) ‘poor' function with no movement disorders; D) ‘poor' function with movement disorders; E) hospitalised relapse with no movement disorders; F) hospitalised relapse with movement disorders; G) post-hospitalisation with no movement disorders; and H) post-hospitalisation with movement disorders. Participants, once educated about schizophrenia, were asked to value each health state using the AQoL, TTO, and a VAS. RESULTS: Mean utility values for all health states ranged from 0.62 to 0.05, 0.72 to 0.54 and 0.74 to 0.19 for the AQoL, TTO and VAS, respectively. For each instrument or scale the rank order of utility values was consistent with the severity of symptoms, with more severe symptoms producing lower scores. Patients experiencing EPS had lower utility scores and hospitalisation also producing utility decrements. There were differences between the global results for AQoL, TTO and VAS (p<0.001, Kruskal-Wallis test) and differences between the utility measures for each health state, except between the TTO and VAS results for health state A (p=0.655), and the AQoL and VAS results for health state G (p=0.094). CONCLUSION: Utility values varied with severity of health state (symptoms) and in most cases differed significantly between instrument and/or scale. For schizophrenia, the AQoL was most sensitive to differing symptom severity, as assessed by the general population. However, further research comparing the different utility instruments is required in this disease area.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2006-03, ISPOR Asia Pacific 2006, Shanghai, China
Code
PMH13
Topic
Patient-Centered Research
Topic Subcategory
Health State Utilities
Disease
Mental Health
Explore Related HEOR by Topic