Valuing temporary and chronic health states associated with breast screening.

The aim of this study was to derive quality of life values for the four key breast screening outcomes (true negative, false positive, true positive and false negative), including the quality of life effects of the screening and treatment processes. In doing so, methodological issues in health status measurement were explored, in particular the valuation of temporary health states. The true negative and false positive descriptions were temporary health states, lasting for short term durations (12 months) and the true positive and false negative outcomes were chronic health states lasting for long term durations (rest of life). Descriptions of breast screening outcomes were valued using the time trade-off technique and the visual analogue scale. Paired comparisons between TTO values for states with the same duration found a difference between the true negative and the false positive time trade-off values but no difference for true positive and false negative descriptions. The TTO values for the false positive were low. The study highlights several important methodological issues such as the use of the two stage procedure for valuing temporary health states, the impact of duration on values, the impact of anchor points, and the importance of qualitative analysis of respondents values. Further empirical testing of all these issues is recommended.

[1]  S. Sutton,et al.  Does routine screening for breast cancer raise anxiety? Results from a three wave prospective study in England. , 1995, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[2]  Harry J. de Koning,et al.  The impact of a breast cancer screening programme on quality‐adjusted life‐years , 1991, International journal of cancer.

[3]  G. Loomes,et al.  The use of QALYs in health care decision making. , 1989, Social science & medicine.

[4]  K. Gerard,et al.  The role of a pre-scored multi-attribute health classification measure in validating condition-specific health state descriptions. , 1999, Health economics.

[5]  I. Gram,et al.  Quality of life following a false positive mammogram. , 1990, British Journal of Cancer.

[6]  A. Gafni,et al.  A Bedside Decision Instrument To Elicit a Patient's Preference Concerning Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer , 1992, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[7]  J. Kenneth Buckingham,et al.  Comparing Three Versions of the Time Tradeoff , 1996, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[8]  E P Steinberg,et al.  Comparison of the Rating Scale and the Standard Gamble in Measuring Patient Preferences for Outcomes of Gallstone Disease , 1994, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[9]  A M Stiggelbout,et al.  The ‘Utility’ of the Visual Analog Scale in Medical Decision Making and Technology Assessment: Is It an Alternative to the Time Trade-off? , 1996, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[10]  K C Cain,et al.  Measuring Preferences for Health States Worse than Death , 1994, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[11]  P. Dolan,et al.  The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. , 1996, Health economics.

[12]  M. Kuppermann,et al.  Can Preference Scores for Discrete States Be Used to Derive Preference Scores for an Entire Path of Events? , 1997, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[13]  M. Dobson,et al.  Measuring utility values for QALYs: two methodological issues. , 1993, Health economics.

[14]  P. Dolan,et al.  Valuing health states: a comparison of methods. , 1996, Journal of health economics.

[15]  I. Ellis,et al.  ABC of Breast Diseases: Prognostic Factors , 1994, BMJ.

[16]  G W Torrance,et al.  Incorporating Utility-Based Quality-of-Life Assessment Measures in Clinical Trials: Two Examples , 1989, Medical care.

[17]  Maureen,et al.  Methodological Issues of Patient Utility Measurement Experience From Two Clinical Trials , 1995, Medical care.

[18]  P. Dolan,et al.  Modelling valuations for health states: the effect of duration. , 1996, Health policy.

[19]  G. Mooney,et al.  Ante-natal screening: what constitutes 'benefit'? , 1993, Social science & medicine.

[20]  J. Richardson,et al.  A cost utility analysis of treatment options for gallstone disease: methodological issues and results. , 1994, Health economics.

[21]  R Tibshirani,et al.  Describing Health States: Methodologic Issues in Obtaining Values for Health States , 1984, Medical care.

[22]  J. Cockburn,et al.  Psychological Consequences of Screening Mammography , 1994, Journal of medical screening.

[23]  C. Donaldson,et al.  Reweighing heat: response to Culyer, van Doorslaer and Wagstaff. , 1992, Journal of Health Economics.

[24]  J. Cairns,et al.  Evaluating the benefits of antenatal screening: an alternative approach. , 1996, Health policy.

[25]  M Baum,et al.  Psychological outcomes of different treatment policies in women with early breast cancer outside a clinical trial. , 1990, BMJ.

[26]  M. Weinstein,et al.  Cost effectiveness of prophylactic intravenous immune globulin in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. , 1991, The New England journal of medicine.

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

[28]  J. Richardson,et al.  A cost utility analysis of mammography screening in Australia. , 1992, Social science & medicine.