Suppr超能文献

利用替代偏好评分和试验内方法估计成本效益:使用 EQ-5D 5 级版本和恢复生活质量效用指数探索质量调整生命年的动态。

Estimating Cost-Effectiveness Using Alternative Preference-Based Scores and Within-Trial Methods: Exploring the Dynamics of the Quality-Adjusted Life-Year Using the EQ-5D 5-Level Version and Recovering Quality of Life Utility Index.

机构信息

Health Economics and Decision Science (HEDS), School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England, UK.

Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, Royal Free Medical School, University College London, London, England, UK.

出版信息

Value Health. 2022 Jun;25(6):1018-1029. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2021.11.1358. Epub 2022 Jan 13.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to explore quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and subsequent cost-effectiveness estimates based on the more physical health-focused EQ-5D 5-level version (EQ-5D-5L) value set for England or cross-walked EQ-5D 3-level version UK value set scores or more mental health recovery-focused Recovering Quality of Life Utility Index (ReQoL-UI), when using alternative within-trial statistical methods. We describe possible reasons for the different QALY estimates based on the interaction between item scores, health state profiles, preference-based scores, and mathematical and statistical methods chosen.

METHODS

QALYs are calculated over 8 weeks from a case study 2:1 (intervention:control) randomized controlled trial in patients with anxiety or depression. Complete case and with missing cases imputed using multiple-imputation analyses are conducted, using unadjusted and regression baseline-adjusted QALYs. Cost-effectiveness is judged using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and acceptability curves. We use previously established psychometric results to reflect on estimated QALYs.

RESULTS

A total of 361 people (241:120) were randomized. EQ-5D-5L crosswalk produced higher incremental QALYs than the value set for England or ReQoL-UI, which produced similar unadjusted QALYs, but contrasting baseline-adjusted QALYs. Probability of cost-effectiveness <£30 000 per QALY ranged from 6% (complete case ReQoL-UI baseline-adjusted QALYs) to 64.3% (multiple-imputation EQ-5D-5L crosswalk unadjusted QALYs). The control arm improved more on average than the intervention arm on the ReQoL-UI, a result not mirrored on the EQ-5D-5L nor condition-specific (Patient-Health Questionnaire-9, depression; Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, anxiety) measures.

CONCLUSIONS

ReQoL-UI produced contradictory cost-effectiveness results relative to the EQ-5D-5L. The EQ-5D-5L's better responsiveness and "anxiety/depression" and "usual activities" items drove the incremental QALY results. The ReQoL-UI's single physical health item and "personal recovery" construct may have influenced its lower 8-week incremental QALY estimates in this patient sample.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在探讨基于更关注身体健康的 EQ-5D 5 级版本(EQ-5D-5L)值集的质量调整生命年(QALY)和后续成本效益估计,或基于交叉的 EQ-5D 3 级版本英国值集评分或更关注心理健康恢复的康复生活质量效用指数(ReQoL-UI),同时使用替代的试验内统计方法。我们根据项目评分、健康状况概况、偏好得分以及选择的数学和统计方法之间的相互作用,描述了基于不同 QALY 估计的可能原因。

方法

从一项焦虑或抑郁患者 2:1(干预:对照)随机对照试验的病例研究中,在 8 周内计算 QALYs。使用未调整和回归基线调整的 QALYs 进行完全案例和使用多重插补分析进行缺失案例插补。使用增量成本效益比和可接受性曲线判断成本效益。我们使用先前建立的心理测量学结果来反映估计的 QALYs。

结果

共有 361 人(241:120)被随机分组。EQ-5D-5L 交叉产生的增量 QALYs 高于英格兰的值集或 ReQoL-UI,后者产生了相似的未调整 QALYs,但基线调整的 QALYs 则不同。增量成本效益比<30000 英镑/QALY 的可能性范围从 6%(完全案例 ReQoL-UI 基线调整的 QALYs)到 64.3%(多重插补 EQ-5D-5L 交叉未调整 QALYs)。ReQoL-UI 平均显示对照臂比干预臂在康复生活质量效用指数上有更大的改善,这一结果在 EQ-5D-5L 或特定于疾病(患者健康问卷-9,抑郁;广泛性焦虑症-7,焦虑)的测量中没有反映出来。

结论

ReQoL-UI 与 EQ-5D-5L 相比产生了矛盾的成本效益结果。EQ-5D-5L 的更好反应性和“焦虑/抑郁”和“日常活动”项目推动了增量 QALY 的结果。ReQoL-UI 的单一身体健康项目和“个人康复”结构可能影响了其在该患者样本中的 8 周增量 QALY 估计较低。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验