IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v15y2014i1d10.1007_s10198-014-0596-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Acceptability of less than perfect health states in rheumatoid arthritis: the patients’ perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Márta Péntek

    (Corvinus University of Budapest
    Flór Ferenc County Hospital)

  • Bernadette Rojkovich

    (Polyclinic of the Hospital Brothers of St. John of God in Budapest)

  • László Czirják

    (University of Pécs)

  • Pál Géher

    (Polyclinic of the Hospital Brothers of St. John of God in Budapest)

  • Péter Keszthelyi

    (Kálmán Pándy Hospital)

  • Attila Kovács

    (Hospital of Hungarian State Railways)

  • László Kovács

    (University of Szeged)

  • Zita Szabó

    (András Jósa Hospital)

  • Zoltán Szekanecz

    (University of Debrecen Medical and Health Science Center)

  • László Tamási

    (Semmelweis Teaching Hospital – Szent Ferenc Hospital Division)

  • Ágnes Edit Tóth

    (Flór Ferenc County Hospital)

  • Ilona Ujfalussy

    (Military Hospital)

  • Noémi Vártokné Hevér

    (Corvinus University of Budapest)

  • Bálint Strbák

    (Corvinus University of Budapest)

  • Petra Baji

    (Corvinus University of Budapest)

  • Valentin Brodszky

    (Corvinus University of Budapest)

  • László Gulácsi

    (Corvinus University of Budapest)

Abstract

Some health problems are considered by many individuals as a ‘normal’ part of ageing. Our aim was to investigate whether patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) consider different types and levels of health losses as acceptable beyond a certain age. A multicenter cross-sectional survey was performed involving RA patients at the initiation of the first biological therapy. The EQ-5D and the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) questionnaires were used to describe domain-specific health states. Patients were asked to indicate for each domain from what age and onward (between ages 30 and 80 years in 10 year intervals) they considered moderate and severe problems acceptable or alternatively never acceptable. Seventy-seven RA patients (females 86 %, mean age 50.3, disease duration 9.1 years) completed the questionnaire. Disease activity (DAS28), EQ-5D and HAQ-DI scores were mean 6.00 (SD 0.85), 0.35 (SD 0.36), 1.48 (SD 0.66), respectively. The majority of the patients considered age 70 and beyond as acceptable to have some health problems (EQ-5D: self-care 42 %, pain/discomfort 34 %, mobility 33 %, usual activities 33 %, anxiety/depression 27 %), whilst at ages 30 and 40 as not acceptable. Severe health problems were mostly (57–69 %) considered never acceptable, except the ‘Usual activities’ domain (acceptable from age 80 by 50.6 %). The great majority of the patients (77–96 %) were younger than what they indicated as the acceptability age limit. Similar results were found for the HAQ-DI. This small experimental study suggests that RA patients consider some health problems acceptable. This acceptability is age related and varies by health areas. Further larger studies are needed to explore explanatory variables and to compare with other diseases. Owing to the impact acceptability might have on RA patients’ self-evaluation of current health state and decision-making, the topic deserves methodological improvement and further investigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Márta Péntek & Bernadette Rojkovich & László Czirják & Pál Géher & Péter Keszthelyi & Attila Kovács & László Kovács & Zita Szabó & Zoltán Szekanecz & László Tamási & Ágnes Edit Tóth & Ilona Ujfalussy , 2014. "Acceptability of less than perfect health states in rheumatoid arthritis: the patients’ perspective," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(1), pages 73-82, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:15:y:2014:i:1:d:10.1007_s10198-014-0596-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-014-0596-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-014-0596-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-014-0596-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marra, Carlo A. & Woolcott, John C. & Kopec, Jacek A. & Shojania, Kamran & Offer, Robert & Brazier, John E. & Esdaile, John M. & Anis, Aslam H., 2005. "A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(7), pages 1571-1582, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brazier, JE & Yang, Y & Tsuchiya, A, 2008. "A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) from non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures," MPRA Paper 29808, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Coast, Joanna, 2018. "A history that goes hand in hand: Reflections on the development of health economics and the role played by Social Science & Medicine, 1967–2017," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 227-232.
    3. Micha J. Pilz & Simon Seyringer & Lára R. Hallsson & Andrew Bottomley & Femke Jansen & Madeleine T. King & Richard Norman & Marianne J. Rutten & Irma M. Verdonck-de Leeuw & Peter D. Siersema & Eva Mar, 2024. "The EORTC QLU-C10D is a valid cancer-specific preference-based measure for cost-utility and health technology assessment in the Netherlands," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(9), pages 1539-1555, December.
    4. Efthymiadou, Olina & Mossman, Jean & Kanavos, Panos, 2019. "Health related quality of life aspects not captured by EQ-5D-5L: Results from an international survey of patients," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 159-165.
    5. David Feeny & Karen Spritzer & Ron D. Hays & Honghu Liu & Theodore G. Ganiats & Robert M. Kaplan & Mari Palta & Dennis G. Fryback, 2012. "Agreement about Identifying Patients Who Change over Time," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(2), pages 273-286, March.
    6. Huguet, Nathalie & Kaplan, Mark S. & Feeny, David, 2008. "Socioeconomic status and health-related quality of life among elderly people: Results from the Joint Canada/United States Survey of Health," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(4), pages 803-810, February.
    7. Ariel Beresniak & Antonieta Medina-Lara & Jean Auray & Alain Wever & Jean-Claude Praet & Rosanna Tarricone & Aleksandra Torbica & Danielle Dupont & Michel Lamure & Gerard Duru, 2015. "Validation of the Underlying Assumptions of the Quality-Adjusted Life-Years Outcome: Results from the ECHOUTCOME European Project," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 61-69, January.
    8. Giacaman, Rita & Mataria, Awad & Nguyen-Gillham, Viet & Safieh, Rula Abu & Stefanini, Angelo & Chatterji, Somnath, 2007. "Quality of life in the Palestinian context: An inquiry in war-like conditions," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 68-84, April.
    9. Garry Barton & Tracey Sach & Michael Doherty & Anthony Avery & Claire Jenkinson & Kenneth Muir, 2008. "An assessment of the discriminative ability of the EQ-5D index , SF-6D, and EQ VAS, using sociodemographic factors and clinical conditions," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(3), pages 237-249, August.
    10. Nick Bansback & Huiying Sun & Daphne P. Guh & Xin Li & Bohdan Nosyk & Susan Griffin & Paul G. Barnett & Aslam H. Anis, 2008. "Impact of the recall period on measuring health utilities for acute events," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(12), pages 1413-1419, December.
    11. Julie A. Campbell & Andrew J. Palmer & Alison Venn & Melanie Sharman & Petr Otahal & Amanda Neil, 2016. "A Head-to-Head Comparison of the EQ-5D-5L and AQoL-8D Multi-Attribute Utility Instruments in Patients Who Have Previously Undergone Bariatric Surgery," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 9(4), pages 311-322, August.
    12. Louis Matza & Sandhya Sapra & John Dillon & Anupama Kalsekar & Evan Davies & Mary Devine & Jessica Jordan & Amanda Landrian & David Feeny, 2015. "Health state utilities associated with attributes of treatments for hepatitis C," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(9), pages 1005-1018, December.
    13. Márta Péntek & László Gulácsi & Bernadette Rojkovich & Valentin Brodszky & Job Exel & Werner Brouwer, 2014. "Subjective health expectations at biological therapy initiation: a survey of rheumatoid arthritis patients and rheumatologists," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(1), pages 83-92, May.
    14. Richard Grieve & Marina Grishchenko & John Cairns, 2009. "SF-6D versus EQ-5D: reasons for differences in utility scores and impact on reported cost-utility," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 10(1), pages 15-23, February.
    15. Garry R. Barton & Tracey H. Sach & Anthony J. Avery & Claire Jenkinson & Michael Doherty & David K. Whynes & Kenneth R. Muir, 2008. "A comparison of the performance of the EQ‐5D and SF‐6D for individuals aged ≥ 45 years," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(7), pages 815-832, July.
    16. Márta Péntek & Bernadette Rojkovich & László Czirják & Pál Géher & Péter Keszthelyi & Attila Kovács & László Kovács & Zita Szabó & Zoltán Szekanecz & László Tamási & Ágnes Tóth & Ilona Ujfalussy & Noé, 2014. "Acceptability of less than perfect health states in rheumatoid arthritis: the patients’ perspective," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(1), pages 73-82, May.
    17. Silvia Garrido & Ildefonso Méndez & José-María Abellán, 2013. "Analysing the Simultaneous Relationship Between Life Satisfaction and Health-Related Quality of Life," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 14(6), pages 1813-1838, December.
    18. Nick Bansback & Huiying Sun & Daphne P. Guh & Xin Li & Bohdan Nosyk & Susan Griffin & Paul G. Barnett & Aslam H. Anis, 2008. "Impact of the recall period on measuring health utilities for acute events," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(12), pages 1413-1419.
    19. Weidong Huang & Hongjuan Yu & Chaojie Liu & Guoxiang Liu & Qunhong Wu & Jin Zhou & Xin Zhang & Xiaowen Zhao & Linmei Shi & Xiaoxue Xu, 2017. "Assessing Health-Related Quality of Life of Chinese Adults in Heilongjiang Using EQ-5D-3L," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, February.
    20. Maike Stolz & Christian Albus & Manfred E. Beutel & Hans-Christian Deter & Kurt Fritzsche & Christoph Herrmann-Lingen & Matthias Michal & Katja Petrowski & Joram Ronel & Jobst-Hendrik Schultz & Wolfga, 2023. "Assessment of health-related quality of life in individuals with depressive symptoms: validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L and the SF-6D," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(8), pages 1297-1307, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Health status; Rheumatoid arthritis; Acceptability; EQ-5D; HAQ-DI;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I19 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Other

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:15:y:2014:i:1:d:10.1007_s10198-014-0596-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.