Comparison of Preference-Based Utilities of the Short-Form 36 Health Survey and Health Utilities Index before and after Treatment of Patients with Intermittent Claudication

Abstract

The authors compared SF-36 utilities with Health Utilities Index (HUI) utilities (HUI2 and HUI3) assessed in patients with intermittent claudication. A total of 87 patients with intermittent claudication completed the SF-36 and HUI before and 1, 3, and 12 months after revascularization. Utilities were estimated using SF-36 and HUI published algorithms (i.e., both algorithms were based on standard-gamble utilities assessed in random samples of the general population). The utilities were compared using repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance, paired t tests, and univariate linear regression analyses. Before treatment, the mean SF-36 and HUI3 utilities were the same (0.66 vs. 0.66, P = 0.92) and less than the mean HUI2 utility (0.70, P = 0.02). After treatment, all utilities showed improvement from before treatment (P < 0.05); the gain in utilities from treatment was lowest when using the SF-36 (e.g., 0.74, 0.80, 0.77 at 3 months for the SF-36, HUI2, and HUI3, respectively). The correlations of changes over time of the SF-36 with HUI2 utilities and of the SF-36 with HUI3 utilities were 0.39 and 0.49, respectively. The relationships between the SF-36 and HUI2 or HUI3 utilities were moderate to good (i.e., range-adjusted R² = 31% to 72%). The results suggest that SF-36 data can be transformed to preference-based utilities and be used for economic evaluation in health care. The gain in utilities from treatment, however, was less for SF-36 utilities than for HUI utilities.

Keywords

health status utilities quality of life Short-Form 36 Health Survey Health Utilities Index intermittent claudication peripheral vascular disease

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Gold MR . Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1996.

Weinstein MC , Siegel JE , Gold MR , Kamlet MS , Russell LB . Recommendations of the panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA. 1996;276:1253-1258.

Siegel JE , Weinstein MC , Russell LB , Gold MR . Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. JAMA. 1996;276: 1339-1341.

Torrance GW , Furlong W , Feeny D , Boyle M. Multi-attribute preference functions: Health Utilities Index. PharmacoEconomics. 1995;7:503-520.

Feeny D , Furlong W , Boyle M , Torrance GW . Multi-attribute health status classification systems: Health Utilities Index. PharmacoEconomics. 1995;7:490-502.

Brooks R , Group E. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Pol icy. 1996;37:53-72.

Brazier H , Usherwood T , Harper R , Thomas K. Deriving a preference-based single index from the UK SF-36 health survey. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51:1115-1128.

Brazier J , Roberts J , Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. 2001. J Health Econ. 2002; 2:271-292.

Tetteroo E , Van der Graaf Y , Bosch JL , Hunink MGM , for the Dutch Iliac Stent Trial Study Group . Randomized comparison of primary stent placement versus angioplasty with selective stent placement in patients with iliac artery disease. Lancet. 1998;18:400-405.

10.

Bosch JL , Van der Graaf Y , Hunink M. Health-related quality of life after angioplasty and stent placement in patients with iliac artery occlusive disease: results of a randomized controlled clinical trial. Circulation. 1999;99:3155-3160.

11.

Bosch JL , Hunink MGM . The relationship between descriptive and valuational quality-of-life measures in patients with intermittent claudication. Med Decis Making. 1996;16:217-225.

12.

Bosch JL , Hunink MG . Comparison of the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) and the EuroQol EQ-5D in patients treated for intermittent claudication. Qual Life Res. 2000;9:591-601.

13.

Ware JE . SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. The Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1993. Boston, MA.

14.

Neumann PJ , Sandberg EA , Araki SS , Kuntz KM , Feeny D , Weinstein MC . A comparison of HU12 and HU13 utility scores in Alzheimer’s disease. Med Decis Making. 2000;20:413-422.

15.

Glick HA , Polsky D , Willke RJ , Shulman KA . A comparison of preference assessment instruments used in a clinical trial: responses to the visual analog scale from the EuroQol EQ-5D and the Health Utilities Index. Med Decis Making. 1999;19:265-275.

16.

Nichol MB , Sengupta N , Globe DR . Evaluating quality-adjusted life years: estimation of the health utility index (HUI2) from the SF-36. Med Decis Making. 2001;21:105-112.

17.

Feeny D , Furlong W , Torrance GW , et al. Multi-attribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index Mark 3 System. Med Care. 2002;40:113-128.