Department of Social and Preventive Medicine and the Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec, Université Laval, Québec, Quebec.
Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences,McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario.
Health Rep. 2018 Nov 21;29(11):12-19.
Utility scores are frequently used as preference weights when estimating quality-adjusted life years within cost-utility analyses or health-adjusted life expectancies. Though previous Canadian estimates for specific chronic conditions have been produced, these may no longer reflect current patient populations.
Data from the 2013 and 2014 Canadian Community Health Survey were used to provide Canadian utility score norms for 17 chronic conditions. Utility scores were estimated using the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 instrument and were reported as weighted average (95% confidence intervals [95% CI]) values. In addition to age- and sex-stratified analyses, results were also stratified according to the number of reported chronic conditions (i.e., "none" to "five or more"). All results were weighted using sampling and bootstrapped weights provided by Statistics Canada.
Utility scores were estimated for 123,654 (97.2%) respondents (weighted frequency = 29,337,370 [97.7%]). Of the chronic conditions that were examined, asthma had the least detrimental effect (weighted average utility score = 0.803 [95% CI: 0.795 to 0.811]) on respondents' utility scores, and Alzheimer's disease or any other dementia had the most detrimental effect (weighted average utility score = 0.374 [95% CI: 0.323 to 0.426]). Respondents who reported suffering from no chronic conditions had, on average, the highest utility scores (weighted average utility score = 0.928 [95% CI: 0.926 to 0.930]). Estimates dropped as a function of the number of reported chronic conditions.
Utility scores differed between various chronic conditions and as a function of the number of reported chronic conditions. Results also highlighted several differences with previously published Canadian utility norms.
在成本效用分析或健康调整期望寿命中,效用评分常被用作估计质量调整生命年的偏好权重。尽管已经产生了针对特定慢性疾病的先前加拿大估计,但这些估计可能不再反映当前的患者群体。
使用 2013 年和 2014 年加拿大社区健康调查的数据,为 17 种慢性疾病提供加拿大效用评分标准。使用健康效用指数标记 3 号工具估算效用评分,并报告加权平均值(95%置信区间[95%CI])值。除了按年龄和性别分层分析外,结果还按报告的慢性疾病数量进行分层(即“无”到“五种或更多”)。所有结果均使用加拿大统计局提供的抽样和引导权重进行加权。
对 123,654 名(97.2%)应答者(加权频率=29,337,370[97.7%])进行了效用评分估计。在所检查的慢性疾病中,哮喘对应答者的效用评分影响最小(加权平均效用评分=0.803[95%CI:0.795 至 0.811]),而阿尔茨海默病或任何其他痴呆症影响最大(加权平均效用评分=0.374[95%CI:0.323 至 0.426])。报告没有患任何慢性疾病的应答者平均具有最高的效用评分(加权平均效用评分=0.928[95%CI:0.926 至 0.930])。随着报告的慢性疾病数量的增加,估计值会下降。
效用评分因各种慢性疾病而异,并随报告的慢性疾病数量而变化。结果还突出显示了与先前发表的加拿大效用标准的几个差异。