Webb Edward Jd, King Natalie, Howdon Daniel, Carrol Enitan D, Euden Joanne, Howard Philip, Pallmann Philip, Llewelyn Martin J, Thomas-Jones Emma, Shinkins Bethany, Sandoe Jonathan
Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Department of Clinical Infection Microbiology and Immunology, Institute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Health Technol Assess. 2024 May 22:1-23. doi: 10.3310/ATPR4281.
Information on the quality of life of people hospitalised with COVID-19 is important, both in assessing the burden of disease and the cost-effectiveness of treatments. However, there were potential barriers to collecting such evidence.
To review the existing evidence on quality of life for people hospitalised with COVID-19, with a focus on the amount of evidence available and methods used.
A scoping review with systematic searches.
A total of 35 papers were selected for data extraction. The most common study type was economic evaluation ( = 13), followed by cross-sectional ( = 10). All economic evaluations used published utility values for other conditions to represent COVID-19 inpatients' quality of life. The most popular quality-of-life survey measure was the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index ( = 8). There were 12 studies that used a mental health-related survey and 12 that used a sleep-related survey. Five studies used EQ-5D, but only one collected responses from people in the acute phase of COVID-19. Studies reported a negative impact on quality of life for people hospitalised with COVID-19, although many studies did not include a formal comparison group.
Although it used systematic searches, this was not a full systematic review.
Quality-of-life data were collected from people hospitalised with COVID-19 from relatively early in the pandemic. However, there was a lack of consensus as to what survey measures to use, and few studies used generic health measures. Economic evaluations for COVID-19 treatments did not use utilities collected from people with COVID-19. In future health crises, researchers should be vigilant for opportunities to collect quality-of-life data from hospitalised patients but should try to co-ordinate as well as ensuring generic health measures are used more.
This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) programme as award number NIHR132254.
新冠病毒病(COVID-19)住院患者的生活质量信息对于评估疾病负担和治疗的成本效益都很重要。然而,收集此类证据存在潜在障碍。
综述关于COVID-19住院患者生活质量的现有证据,重点关注可用证据的数量和所采用的方法。
采用系统检索的范围综述。
共筛选出35篇论文进行数据提取。最常见的研究类型是经济评估(n = 13),其次是横断面研究(n = 10)。所有经济评估均使用其他疾病已发表的效用值来代表COVID-19住院患者的生活质量。最常用的生活质量调查指标是匹兹堡睡眠质量指数(n = 8)。有12项研究使用了与心理健康相关的调查,12项使用了与睡眠相关的调查。5项研究使用了EQ-5D,但只有1项收集了COVID-19急性期患者的回复。研究报告称COVID-19住院患者的生活质量受到负面影响,尽管许多研究未设正式对照组。
尽管采用了系统检索,但本研究并非全面的系统综述。
在疫情相对早期就已收集了COVID-19住院患者的生活质量数据。然而,对于使用何种调查指标缺乏共识,且很少有研究使用通用健康指标。COVID-19治疗的经济评估未使用从COVID-19患者收集的效用值。在未来的健康危机中,研究人员应留意收集住院患者生活质量数据的机会,但应努力进行协调,并确保更多地使用通用健康指标。
本文展示了由英国国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)项目独立资助的研究,资助编号为NIHR132254。