Suppr超能文献

慢性病患者对一般健康状态的重视程度与无慢性病的个体是否不同?以多元文化的亚洲人群为例。

Do chronic disease patients value generic health states differently from individuals with no chronic disease? A case of a multicultural Asian population.

作者信息

Gandhi Mihir, Thumboo Julian, Luo Nan, Wee Hwee-Lin, Cheung Yin-Bun

机构信息

Biostatistics, Singapore Clinical Research Institute, Singapore, Singapore.

Centre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, Singapore.

出版信息

Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015 Jan 23;13:8. doi: 10.1186/s12955-014-0200-6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is conflicting evidence as to whether patients with chronic disease value hypothetical health states differently from individuals who have not experienced any long-lasting diseases. Furthermore, most studies regarding this issue have been conducted in western countries, with only one conducted in Asia. We aimed to evaluate possible systematic differences in the valuation of EuroQol Group five dimensions 3-level (EQ-5D-3L) health states by chronic disease patients and a population with no chronic disease in Singapore.

METHODS

A face-to-face survey for the valuation of the 42 health states of the EQ-5D-3L using the visual analogue scale (VAS) method was conducted in Singapore. The survey also asked participants to report any chronic diseases they had. Ordinary least-square regression models were employed to assess possible differences in the valuation scores of all health states, severe health states and non-severe health states by individual chronic disease patient groups (diabetes, rheumatism, hypertension, heart diseases and lung diseases) and by a group of participants with no chronic disease. A difference of 4 to 8 points on the 100-point VAS was considered to be of practical significance.

RESULTS

The analysis included 332 participants with at least one chronic disease and 651 participants with no chronic disease. After taking health state descriptors and covariates into account, mean valuation scores of the 42 health states by the heart disease group were higher by 4.6 points (p-value = 0.032) compared to the no chronic disease group. Specifically, the heart disease group valued severe health states 5.4 points higher (p-value = 0.025) than the no chronic disease group. There was no practically significant difference in the mean valuation score of non-severe health states between the heart disease group and the no chronic disease group. No practically significant differences were found in the mean valuation score of all health states, severe health states and non-severe health states between any other chronic disease group and the no chronic disease group.

CONCLUSIONS

In Singapore, heart disease patients valued EQ-5D-3L severe health states differently from individuals with no chronic disease. Other chronic disease groups did not value EQ-5D-3L health states differently from the no chronic disease group.

摘要

背景

关于慢性病患者对假设健康状态的重视程度是否与未经历任何长期疾病的个体不同,存在相互矛盾的证据。此外,关于这个问题的大多数研究是在西方国家进行的,在亚洲仅进行了一项研究。我们旨在评估新加坡慢性病患者和无慢性病人群对欧洲五维健康量表3级(EQ - 5D - 3L)健康状态估值的可能系统差异。

方法

在新加坡使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)法对EQ - 5D - 3L的42种健康状态进行面对面估值调查。该调查还要求参与者报告他们患有的任何慢性病。采用普通最小二乘回归模型评估所有健康状态、严重健康状态和非严重健康状态的估值分数在各个慢性病患者组(糖尿病、风湿病、高血压、心脏病和肺病)与无慢性病参与者组之间的可能差异。在100分的VAS上,4至8分的差异被认为具有实际意义。

结果

分析纳入了332名至少患有一种慢性病的参与者和651名无慢性病的参与者。在考虑健康状态描述符和协变量后,心脏病组对42种健康状态的平均估值分数比无慢性病组高4.6分(p值 = 0.032)。具体而言,心脏病组对严重健康状态的估值比无慢性病组高5.4分(p值 = 0.025)。心脏病组与无慢性病组之间非严重健康状态的平均估值分数没有实际显著差异。在任何其他慢性病组与无慢性病组之间,所有健康状态、严重健康状态和非严重健康状态的平均估值分数均未发现实际显著差异。

结论

在新加坡,心脏病患者对EQ - 5D - 3L严重健康状态的重视程度与无慢性病个体不同。其他慢性病组对EQ - 5D - 3L健康状态的重视程度与无慢性病组没有差异。

相似文献

2
How is the most severe health state being valued by the general population?
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014 Oct 25;12:161. doi: 10.1186/s12955-014-0161-9.
4
The discriminative power of the EuroQol visual analog scale is sensitive to survey language in Singapore.
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012 Mar 20;10:32. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-10-32.
5
Self vs. other, child vs. adult. An experimental comparison of valuation perspectives for valuation of EQ-5D-Y-3L health states.
Eur J Health Econ. 2021 Dec;22(9):1507-1518. doi: 10.1007/s10198-021-01377-y. Epub 2021 Oct 6.
10
A comparison of the EQ-5D-3L and ICECAP-O in an older post-acute patient population relative to the general population.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2013 Aug;11(4):415-25. doi: 10.1007/s40258-013-0039-8.

引用本文的文献

1
Determinants of Health Preferences Using Data from the Egyptian EQ-5D-5L Valuation Study.
Patient. 2022 Sep;15(5):589-598. doi: 10.1007/s40271-022-00572-0. Epub 2022 Feb 14.
2
Psychometric Validation of the EQ-5D-3L in Patients with Nontuberculous Mycobacterial (NTM) Lung Disease Caused by Complex (MAC).
Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2021 Feb 25;12:45-54. doi: 10.2147/PROM.S272075. eCollection 2021.
4
Comparison of health state values derived from patients and individuals from the general population.
Qual Life Res. 2017 Dec;26(12):3353-3363. doi: 10.1007/s11136-017-1683-5. Epub 2017 Aug 14.
5
Determinants of time trade-off valuations for EQ-5D-5L health states: data from the Canadian EQ-5D-5L valuation study.
Qual Life Res. 2016 Jul;25(7):1679-85. doi: 10.1007/s11136-015-1203-4. Epub 2015 Dec 10.

本文引用的文献

1
Does diabetes have an impact on health-state utility? a study of Asians in Singapore.
Patient. 2014;7(3):329-37. doi: 10.1007/s40271-014-0059-y.
3
The effect of chronic conditions on stated preferences for health.
Eur J Health Econ. 2013 Aug;14(4):697-702. doi: 10.1007/s10198-012-0421-8. Epub 2012 Sep 1.
4
Elicitation of informed general population health state utility values: a review of the literature.
Value Health. 2011 Dec;14(8):1153-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.05.046. Epub 2011 Aug 6.
5
Are patients' judgments of health status really different from the general population?
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011 May 11;9:31. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-9-31.
6
Health outcomes in economic evaluation: who should value health?
Br Med Bull. 2011;97:197-210. doi: 10.1093/bmb/ldr001. Epub 2011 Jan 31.
7
Self-report as an indicator of incident disease.
Ann Epidemiol. 2010 Jul;20(7):547-54. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2010.03.017.
10
The use of QALYs in clinical and patient decision-making: issues and prospects.
Value Health. 2009 Mar;12 Suppl 1:S27-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00519.x.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验