Valuations of epilepsy-specific health states: A comparison of patients with epilepsy and the general population
- Publication Type:
- Journal Article
- Epilepsy and Behavior, 2014, 36 pp. 12 - 17
- Issue Date:
|Valuations of epilepsy-specific health states a comparison of patients.pdf||Published Version||358.01 kB|
Copyright Clearance Process
- Recently Added
- In Progress
- Closed Access
This item is closed access and not available.
Aims: Utility values that can be used in the economic evaluation of treatments for epilepsy can be elicited from the general population and the patient population, but it is unclear how the health state values differ. The aim of this study is to compare the preferences of the general population and a sample of people with epilepsy for health states described by the NEWQOL-6D QALY measure. Methods: The Time Trade Off preference elicitation technique was used to value eight NEWQOL-6D health states. The general population sample was recruited and interviewed in their homes, and the sample with epilepsy was recruited and interviewed in an epilepsy service in North West England. Descriptive analysis and regression modeling were used to compare health state values across the populations. Results: A sample of 70 people with epilepsy and a sample of 60 members of the general population were included. The populations differed across a range of background characteristics, but there were limited differences between the health state values. Patients provided significantly higher (better) values for the most severe health state described by the NEWQOL-6D (p < 0.01) and nonsignificant higher values for states with intermediate severity. The general population health state value was only higher for the best health state described by the NEWQOL-6D. Conclusions: The similarities in the patient and general population values for NEWQOL-6D health states suggest that the use of the general population utility weights for the estimation of QALYs in the economic evaluation of epilepsy interventions is appropriate and largely representative of patient preferences. © 2014 Elsevier Inc.
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: