Franic Duska M, Bothe Anne K, Bramlett Robin E
Dept. of Clinical and Administrative Pharmacy, RC Wilson Building Room 260N, University of Georgia, 250 W Green St, Athens, GA 30602, USA.
J Commun Disord. 2012 Sep-Oct;45(5):378-89. doi: 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2012.05.001. Epub 2012 May 18.
To assess the feasibility of using one or more of four standard economic preference measures to assess health-related quality of life in stuttering, by assessing respondents' views of the acceptability of those measures.
A graphic positioning scale approach was used with 80 adults to assess four variables previously defined as reflecting the construct of respondent acceptability (difficulty of decision making, clarity of text, reasonableness for decision making, and comfort in decision making) for four types of preference measurement approaches (rating scale, standard gamble, time trade-off, and willingness to pay). A multivariate repeated measures analysis of variance (p<.001) and follow-up univariate repeated measures analyses of variance (all p<.01) were all significant, indicating that respondents perceived differences among the preference measurement methods on all four acceptability variables.
The rating scale was perceived as the easiest, clearest, most reasonable, and most comfortable tool, but it is not a measure of utility (an economic term for desirability or worth). If utility is the objective, such as for cost-utility analyses in stuttering, then the present results suggest the use of standard gamble (rather than time trade-off). These results also support the use of willingness to pay assessments for cost-benefit analyses in stuttering. These findings supplement results previously obtained for other chronic conditions.
The reader will be able to: (1) describe how four standard economic preference measures [rating scale (RS), time trade-off (TTO), standard gamble (SG), and willingness to pay (WTP)] can be used in economic analyses; (2) describe how RS, TTO, SG and WTP can be measured; and (3) describe how respondents perceive the use of RS, TTO, SG and WTP in measuring changes in stuttering.
通过评估受访者对四种标准经济偏好测量方法的可接受性观点，来评估使用其中一种或多种方法评估口吃患者健康相关生活质量的可行性。
采用图形定位量表法对80名成年人进行调查，以评估四种类型的偏好测量方法（评分量表、标准博弈、时间权衡和支付意愿）在四个先前定义为反映受访者可接受性结构的变量（决策难度、文本清晰度、决策合理性和决策舒适度）方面的情况。多变量重复测量方差分析（p<.001）以及后续的单变量重复测量方差分析（均p<.01）均具有显著性，表明受访者在所有四个可接受性变量上都察觉到了偏好测量方法之间的差异。
评分量表被认为是最简便、最清晰、最合理且最舒适的工具，但它并非效用（经济学中表示合意性或价值的术语）的测量方法。如果效用是目标，例如在口吃的成本效用分析中，那么目前的结果表明应使用标准博弈（而非时间权衡）。这些结果也支持在口吃的成本效益分析中使用支付意愿评估。这些发现补充了先前针对其他慢性病所获得的结果。
读者将能够：（1）描述四种标准经济偏好测量方法[评分量表（RS）、时间权衡（TTO）、标准博弈（SG）和支付意愿（WTP）]如何用于经济分析；（2）描述RS、TTO、SG和WTP如何进行测量；以及（3）描述受访者如何看待RS、TTO、SG和WTP在测量口吃变化中的应用。
