Can Utility-Weighted Health-Related Quality-of-Life Estimates Capture Health Effects of Quality Improvement for Depression?

Background.Utility methods that are responsive to changes in desirable outcomes are needed for cost-effectiveness (CE) analyses and to help in decisions about resource allocation. Objectives.Evaluated is the responsiveness of different methods that assign utility weights to subsets of SF-36 items to average improvements in health resulting from quality improvement (QI) interventions for depression. Design.A group level, randomized, control trial in 46 primary care clinics in six managed care organizations. Clinics were randomized to one of two QI interventions or usual care. Subjects.One thousand one hundred thirty-six patients with current depressive symptoms and either 12-month, lifetime, or no depressive disorder identified through screening 27,332 consecutive patients. Measures.Utility weighted SF-12 or SF-36 measures, probable depression, and physical and mental health-related quality of life scores. Results.Several utility-weighted measures showed increases in utility values for patients in one of the interventions, relative to usual care, that paralleled the improved health effects for depression and emotional well being. However, QALY gains were small. Directly elicited utility values showed a paradoxical result of lower utility during the first year of the study for intervention patients relative to controls. Conclusions.The results raise concerns about the use of direct single-item utility measures or utility measures derived from generic health status measures in effectiveness studies for depression. Choice of measure may lead to different conclusions about the benefit and CE of treatment. Utility measures that capture the mental health and non-health outcomes associated with treatment for depression are needed.

[1]  Nicole A. Lazar,et al.  Statistical Analysis With Missing Data , 2003, Technometrics.

[2]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  Long-term effectiveness of disseminating quality improvement for depression in primary care. , 2001, Archives of general psychiatry.

[3]  L A Lenert,et al.  Utility Elicitation Using Single-Item Questions Compared with a Computerized Interview , 2001, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[4]  M. Boyle,et al.  Cost-utility analysis in depression: the McSad utility measure for depression health states. , 2000, Psychiatric services.

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

[6]  C. Callahan Improving quality of care for depression in primary care. , 2000, Medical care.

[7]  David E. Booth,et al.  Analysis of Incomplete Multivariate Data , 2000, Technometrics.

[8]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  Impact of disseminating quality improvement programs for depression in managed primary care: a randomized controlled trial. , 2000, JAMA.

[9]  S. Jansen,et al.  Unstable Preferences: , 2000, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[10]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  Functioning and utility for current health of patients with depression or chronic medical conditions in managed, primary care practices. , 1999, Archives of general psychiatry.

[11]  K. Wells,et al.  Evidence-based care for depression in managed primary care practices. , 1999, Health affairs.

[12]  J. Brazier,et al.  A Review of the Use of Health Status Measures in Economic Evaluation , 1999, Journal of health services research & policy.

[13]  L A Lenert,et al.  Associations between health status and utilities implications for policy. , 1999, Medical care.

[14]  M Johannesson,et al.  The Relationship between Health-state Utilities and the SF-12 in a General Population , 1999, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[15]  A. Shmueli,et al.  Subjective Health Status and Health Values in the General Population , 1999, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[16]  J. Brazier,et al.  Deriving a preference-based single index from the UK SF-36 Health Survey. , 1998, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[17]  Catherine A. Sugar,et al.  Empirically defined health states for depression from the SF-12. , 1998, Health services research.

[18]  W F Lawrence,et al.  Predicting Quality of Well-being Scores from the SF-36 , 1997, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[19]  J. Pater Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials , 1996 .

[20]  M. Gold,et al.  Panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. , 1996, Medical care.

[21]  M C Weinstein,et al.  Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. , 1996, JAMA.

[22]  Milton C. Weinstein,et al.  Recommendations for Reporting Cost-effectiveness Analyses , 1996 .

[23]  M. Weinstein,et al.  Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. , 1996, JAMA.

[24]  J. Bosch,et al.  The Relationship between Descriptive and Valuational Quality-of-life Measures in Patients with Intermittent Claudication , 1996, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[25]  D M Murray,et al.  Gauss or Bernoulli? , 1996, Evaluation review.

[26]  D A Revicki,et al.  Change in clinical status, health status, and health utility outcomes in HIV-infected patients. , 1995, Medical care.

[27]  H. Llewellyn-Thomas,et al.  Do Patients' Evaluations of a Future Health State Change When They Actually Enter That State? , 1993, Medical care.

[28]  R. Little Pattern-Mixture Models for Multivariate Incomplete Data , 1993 .

[29]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) , 1992 .

[30]  D. Rubin,et al.  Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. , 1989 .

[31]  G. Torrance Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. , 1986, Journal of health economics.

[32]  Cynthia Oshita,et al.  The Harvard School of Public Health , 1921, Science.

[33]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  Comparing treatment valuations between and within subjects in clinical trials: does it make a difference? , 2000, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[34]  K. Wells The design of Partners in Care: evaluating the cost-effectiveness of improving care for depression in primary care , 1999, Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology.

[35]  T. Patterson,et al.  Preliminary longitudinal assessment of quality of life in patients with major depression. , 1997, Psychopharmacology bulletin.

[36]  R. Klein,et al.  Results from the Beaver Dam Health Outcomes Study , 1997 .

[37]  John P. Anderson,et al.  The general health policy model: an integrated approach , 1996 .

[38]  Alan D. Lopez,et al.  The global burden of disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality and disability from diseases injuries and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. , 1996 .

[39]  B. Spilker,et al.  Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials , 1996 .

[40]  G W Torrance,et al.  Multi-attribute health status classification systems. Health Utilities Index. , 1995, PharmacoEconomics.

[41]  G W Torrance,et al.  Multi-attribute preference functions. Health Utilities Index. , 1995, PharmacoEconomics.

[42]  A. Kasuya EuroQol--a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. , 1990, Health policy.

[43]  A. Williams EuroQol : a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life , 1990 .

[44]  R. Kane,et al.  Methodology for measuring health-state preferences--II: Scaling methods. , 1989, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[45]  R L Kane,et al.  Methodology for measuring health-state preferences--I: Measurement strategies. , 1989, Journal of clinical epidemiology.