Development of a preference-based index from the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25.

IMPORTANCE Understanding how individuals value health states is central to patient-centered care and to health policy decision making. Generic preference-based measures of health may not effectively capture the impact of ocular diseases. Recently, 6 items from the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 were used to develop the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index health state classification, which defines visual function health states. OBJECTIVE To describe elicitation of preferences for health states generated from the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index health state classification and development of an algorithm to estimate health preference scores for any health state. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Nonintervention, cross-sectional study of the general community in 4 countries (Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, and United States). A total of 607 adult participants were recruited from local newspaper advertisements. In the United Kingdom, an existing database of participants from previous studies was used for recruitment. INTERVENTIONS Eight of 15,625 possible health states from the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index were valued using time trade-off technique. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES A θ severity score was calculated for Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index-defined health states using item response theory analysis. Regression models were then used to develop an algorithm to assign health state preference values for all potential health states defined by the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index. RESULTS Health state preference values for the 8 states ranged from a mean (SD) of 0.343 (0.395) to 0.956 (0.124). As expected, preference values declined with worsening visual function. Results indicate that the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index describes states that participants view as spanning most of the continuum from full health to dead. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index health state classification produces health preference scores that can be estimated in vision-related studies that include the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25. These preference scores may be of value for estimating utilities in economic and health policy analyses.

[1]  Karl Claxton,et al.  Unrelated Future Costs and Unrelated Future Benefits: Reflections on NICE Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. , 2016, Health economics.

[2]  S. Gupta,et al.  Dexamethasone intravitreal implant in combination with laser photocoagulation for the treatment of diffuse diabetic macular edema. , 2013, Ophthalmology.

[3]  D. Revicki,et al.  Normative comparison of patient-reported outcomes in patients with noninfectious uveitis. , 2013, JAMA ophthalmology.

[4]  M. Barkham,et al.  Developing and testing methods for deriving preference-based measures of health from condition-specific measures (and other patient-based measures of outcome). , 2012, Health technology assessment.

[5]  M. Palta,et al.  Agreement about Identifying Patients Who Change over Time , 2012, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[6]  J. Vander.  Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant for Noninfectious Intermediate or Posterior Uveitis , 2012 .

[7]  J. Brazier,et al.  Outcomes of social care for adults: developing a preference-weighted measure. , 2012, Health technology assessment.

[8]  N. Bressler,et al.  Rasch analysis in the development of a simplified version of the national eye institute visual-function questionnaire-25 for utility estimation , 2012, Quality of Life Research.

[9]  M. Blumenkranz,et al.  Dexamethasone intravitreal implant in patients with macular edema related to branch or central retinal vein occlusion twelve-month study results. , 2011, Ophthalmology.

[10]  Dorota L. Stankowska,et al.  Neuroprotection in Glaucoma , 2011 .

[11]  Benjamin M Craig,et al.  Deriving a preference-based measure for cancer using the EORTC QLQ-C30. , 2011, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[12]  C. Lowder,et al.  Dexamethasone intravitreal implant for noninfectious intermediate or posterior uveitis. , 2011, Archives of ophthalmology.

[13]  J. Brazier,et al.  Estimating a Preference-Based Index for a 5-Dimensional Health State Classification for Asthma Derived from the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire , 2011, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[14]  J. Brazier,et al.  Developing preference-based health measures: using Rasch analysis to generate health state values , 2010, Quality of Life Research.

[15]  Aki Tsuchiya,et al.  A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures , 2010, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[16]  M. Drummond,et al.  Retaining, and enhancing, the QALY. , 2009, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[17]  M. Weinstein,et al.  QALYs: the basics. , 2009, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[18]  J. Brazier,et al.  Estimating a preference-based single index from the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire. , 2006, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[19]  J. Brazier,et al.  The first stage of developing preference-based measures: constructing a health-state classification using Rasch analysis , 2009, Quality of Life Research.

[20]  J. Cairns,et al.  Converting condition-specific measures into preference-based outcomes for use in economic evaluation , 2008, Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research.

[21]  Aki Tsuchiya,et al.  Using the health assessment questionnaire to estimate preference-based single indices in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. , 2007, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[22]  S. Kymes,et al.  Preference-Based Quality of Life Measures in People with Visual Impairment , 2007, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[23]  Martin J Buxton,et al.  Mapping from disease-specific measures to utility: an analysis of the relationships between the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire and Crohn's Disease Activity Index in Crohn's disease and measures of utility. , 2007, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[24]  Paul P. Lee,et al.  Health literacy and adherence to glaucoma therapy. , 2006, American journal of ophthalmology.

[25]  D. Revicki,et al.  Rhinitis Symptom Utility Index (RSUI) in Chinese Subjects: A Multiattribute Patient-preference Approach , 2006, Quality of Life Research.

[26]  Jill Carlton,et al.  The impact of age-related macular degeneration on health status utility values. , 2005, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[27]  E. Bass,et al.  Health- and vision-related quality of life among patients with choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration at enrollment in randomized trials of submacular surgery: SST report no. 4. , 2004, American journal of ophthalmology.

[28]  S. Azen,et al.  The impact of visual impairment on self-reported visual functioning in Latinos: The Los Angeles Latino Eye Study. , 2004, Ophthalmology.

[29]  M. R. Espejo.  Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences , 2004 .

[30]  C. Thompson,et al.  Development and preliminary validation of the multiattribute Rhinitis Symptom Utility Index , 1998, Quality of Life Research.

[31]  J. Doyle,et al.  Utility assessment among patients with dry eye disease. , 2003, Ophthalmology.

[32]  G. Brown,et al.  Quality of life with macular degeneration: perceptions of patients, clinicians, and community members , 2003, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[33]  Frank de Charro,et al.  The Measurement and Valuation of Health Status Using EQ-5D: A European Perspective , 2003, Springer Netherlands.

[34]  J. Brazier,et al.  The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. , 2002, Journal of health economics.

[35]  R. Rabin,et al.  EQ-SD: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group , 2001, Annals of medicine.

[36]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  Estimation of utilities for the effects of depression from the SF-12. , 2000, Medical care.

[37]  R. Hays,et al.  Psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ). NEI-VFQ Field Test Investigators , 1998 .

[38]  D A Revicki,et al.  Integrating patient preferences into health outcomes assessment: the multiattribute Asthma Symptom Utility Index. , 1998, Chest.

[39]  R. Hambleton,et al.  Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory , 1997 .

[40]  F. Samejima.  Graded Response Model , 1997 .

[41]  M. Gold,et al.  Assessing the health of the nation. The predictive validity of a preference-based measure and self-rated health. , 1996, Medical care.

[42]  David Feeny,et al.  Guide to design and development of health-state utility instrumentation , 1992 .

[43]  R. Hambleton,et al.  Fundamentals of Item Response Theory , 1991 .

[44]  G. Masters,et al.  Rating Scale Analysis. Rasch Measurement. , 1983 .