IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v37y2019i7d10.1007_s40273-019-00775-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating Quality of Life Decrements Due to Diabetes Complications in the United States: The Health Utility Index (HUI) Diabetes Complication Equation

Author

Listed:
  • Hui Shao

    (Tulane University)

  • Shuang Yang

    (Tulane University)

  • Vivian Fonseca

    (Tulane University)

  • Charles Stoecker

    (Tulane University)

  • Lizheng Shi

    (Tulane University)

Abstract

Objective Health utility decrements associated with diabetes mellitus complications are essential for calculating quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) in patients for use in economic evaluation of diabetes interventions. Previous studies mostly focused on assessing the impact of complications on health utility at event year based on cross-sectional data. This study aimed to separately estimate health utility decrements associated with current and previous diabetes complications. Research Design and Methods The Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI-3) was used to measure heath utility in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial (N = 8713). Five macrovascular complications (myocardial infarction [MI], congestive heart failure [CHF], stroke, angina, and revascularization surgery [RS]) and three microvascular complications (nephropathy [renal failure], retinopathy [severe vision loss], and neuropathy [severe pressure sensation loss]) were included in a set of alternative modelling approaches including the ordinary least squares (OLS) model, fixed effects model, and random effects model to estimate the complication-related health utility decrements. Results All macrovascular complications were associated with decrements of HUI-3 scores: MI (event year: − 0.042, successive years: − 0.011), CHF (event year: − 0.089, successive years: − 0.041), stroke (event year: − 0.204, successive years: − 0.101), angina (event year: − 0.010, successive years: − 0.032), and revascularization (event year: − 0.038, successive years: − 0.016) (all p

Suggested Citation

  • Hui Shao & Shuang Yang & Vivian Fonseca & Charles Stoecker & Lizheng Shi, 2019. "Estimating Quality of Life Decrements Due to Diabetes Complications in the United States: The Health Utility Index (HUI) Diabetes Complication Equation," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(7), pages 921-929, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:37:y:2019:i:7:d:10.1007_s40273-019-00775-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-019-00775-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-019-00775-8
    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/s40273-019-00775-8?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. Brazier, John & Roberts, Jennifer & Deverill, Mark, 2002. "The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 271-292, March.
    2. Drummond, Michael F. & Sculpher, Mark J. & Claxton, Karl & Stoddart, Greg L. & Torrance, George W., 2015. "Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 4, number 9780199665884.
    3. Walters, SJ & Brazier, JE, 2002. "Sample sizes for the SF-6D preference based measure of health from the SF-36: a practical guide," MPRA Paper 29742, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Adrian Bagust & Sophie Beale, 2005. "Modelling EuroQol health‐related utility values for diabetic complications from CODE‐2 data," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 217-230, March.
    5. S. Fanshel & J. W. Bush, 1970. "A Health-Status Index and its Application to Health-Services Outcomes," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 1021-1066, December.
    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. Lisa R. Ulrich & Juliana J. Petersen & Karola Mergenthal & Andrea Berghold & Gudrun Pregartner & Rolf Holle & Andrea Siebenhofer, 2019. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of case management for optimized antithrombotic treatment in German general practices compared to usual care – results from the PICANT trial," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Bromley, Hannah L. & Petrie, Dennis & Mann, G.Bruce & Nickson, Carolyn & Rea, Daniel & Roberts, Tracy E., 2019. "Valuing the health states associated with breast cancer screening programmes: A systematic review of economic measures," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 142-154.
    3. Majmudar, Ishani Kartik & Mihalopoulos, Cathy & Abimanyi-Ochom, Julie & Mohebbi, Mohammadreza & Engel, Lidia, 2024. "The association between loneliness with health service use and quality of life among informal carers in Australia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 348(C).
    4. John Brazier & Donna Rowen & Yaling Yang & Aki Tsuchiya, 2012. "Comparison of health state utility values derived using time trade-off, rank and discrete choice data anchored on the full health-dead scale," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(5), pages 575-587, October.
    5. Andrew Lloyd & Kim Rand & Cleo Pike & Crispin Ellis, 2024. "Preference-based utility weights for the Individualized Neuromuscular Quality of Life Questionnaire (INQoL), with a focus on non-dystrophic myotonia (NDM)," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(8), pages 1461-1469, November.
    6. Matthijs M. Versteegh & Annemieke Leunis & Jolanda J. Luime & Mike Boggild & Carin A. Uyl-de Groot & Elly A. Stolk, 2012. "Mapping QLQ-C30, HAQ, and MSIS-29 on EQ-5D," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(4), pages 554-568, July.
    7. Chen-Wei Pan & Hong-Peng Sun & Hui-Jun Zhou & Qinghua Ma & Yong Xu & Nan Luo & Pei Wang, 2016. "Valuing Health-Related Quality of Life in Type 2 Diabetes Patients in China," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(2), pages 234-241, February.
    8. Gustav Kjellsson & Dennis Petrie & Tom (T.G.M.) van Ourti, 2018. "Measuring income-related inequalities in risky health prospects," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 18-007/V, Tinbergen Institute.
    9. Andrew J. Palmer & Julie A. Campbell & Barbara de Graaff & Nancy Devlin & Hasnat Ahmad & Philip M Clarke & Mingsheng Chen & Lei Si, 2021. "Population norms for quality adjusted life years for the United States of America, China, the United Kingdom and Australia," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(8), pages 1950-1977, August.
    10. Mina Bahrampour & Joshua Byrnes & Richard Norman & Paul A. Scuffham & Martin Downes, 2020. "Discrete choice experiments to generate utility values for multi-attribute utility instruments: a systematic review of methods," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(7), pages 983-992, September.
    11. Joseph Kwon & Sung Wook Kim & Wendy J. Ungar & Kate Tsiplova & Jason Madan & Stavros Petrou, 2018. "A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Childhood Health Utilities," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(3), pages 277-305, April.
    12. Rodríguez-Míguez, E. & Abellán-Perpiñán, J.M. & Alvarez, X.C. & González, X.M. & Sampayo, A.R., 2016. "The DEP-6D, a new preference-based measure to assess health states of dependency," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 210-219.
    13. Brendan Mulhern & Richard Norman & Deborah J. Street & Rosalie Viney, 2019. "One Method, Many Methodological Choices: A Structured Review of Discrete-Choice Experiments for Health State Valuation," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 29-43, January.
    14. Xinyu Qian & Rachel Lee-Yin Tan & Ling-Hsiang Chuang & Nan Luo, 2020. "Measurement Properties of Commonly Used Generic Preference-Based Measures in East and South-East Asia: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 159-170, February.
    15. Spencer, Anne & Rivero-Arias, Oliver & Wong, Ruth & Tsuchiya, Aki & Bleichrodt, Han & Edwards, Rhiannon Tudor & Norman, Richard & Lloyd, Andrew & Clarke, Philip, 2022. "The QALY at 50: One story many voices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 296(C).
    16. Paul Allanson & Dennis Petrie, 2021. "A unified framework to account for selective mortality in lifecycle analyses of the social gradient in health," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(9), pages 2230-2245, September.
    17. Brazier, J & Rowen, D & Yang, Y & Tsuchiya, A, 2009. "Using rank and discrete choice data to estimate health state utility values on the QALY scale," MPRA Paper 29891, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Chiranjeev Sanyal & Don Husereau, 2020. "Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of Services Provided by Community Pharmacists," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 375-392, June.
    19. Francesca Cornaglia & Naomi E. Feldman & Andrew Leigh, 2014. "Crime and Mental Well-Being," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 49(1), pages 110-140.
    20. Andrew J. Mirelman & Miqdad Asaria & Bryony Dawkins & Susan Griffin & Richard Cookson & Peter Berman, 2020. "Fairer Decisions, Better Health for All: Health Equity and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Paul Revill & Marc Suhrcke & Rodrigo Moreno-Serra & Mark Sculpher (ed.), Global Health Economics Shaping Health Policy in Low- and Middle-Income Countries, chapter 4, pages 99-132, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..

    More about this item

    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:pharme:v:37:y:2019:i:7:d:10.1007_s40273-019-00775-8. 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.