Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Quality of Life Research 7/2018

Open Access 01-07-2018 | Review

Preference-based measures to obtain health state utility values for use in economic evaluations with child-based populations: a review and UK-based focus group assessment of patient and parent choices

Authors: Jane L. Wolstenholme, Danielle Bargo, Kay Wang, Anthony Harnden, Ulla Räisänen, Lucy Abel

Published in: Quality of Life Research | Issue 7/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

No current guidance is available in the UK on the choice of preference-based measure (PBM) that should be used in obtaining health-related quality of life from children. The aim of this study is to review the current usage of PBMs for obtaining health state utility values in child and adolescent populations, and to obtain information on patient and parent–proxy respondent preferences in completing PBMs in the UK.

Methods

A literature review was conducted to determine which instrument is most frequently used for child-based economic evaluations and whether child or proxy responses are used. Instruments were compared on dimensions, severity levels, elicitation and valuation methods, availability of value sets and validation studies, and the range of utility values generated. Additionally, a series of focus groups of parents and young people (11–20 years) were convened to determine patient and proxy preferences.

Results

Five PBMs suitable for child populations were identified, although only the Health Utilities Index 2 (HUI2) and Child Heath Utility 9D (CHU-9D) have UK value sets. 45 papers used PBMs in this population, but many used non-child-specific PBMs. Most respondents were parent proxies, even in adolescent populations. Reported missing data ranged from 0.5 to 49.3%. The focus groups reported their experiences with the EQ-5D-Y and CHU-9D. Both the young persons’ group and parent/proxy groups felt that the CHU-9D was more comprehensive but may be harder for a proxy to complete. Some younger children had difficulty understanding the CHU-9D questions, but the young persons’ group nonetheless preferred responding directly.

Conclusion

The use of PBMs in child populations is increasing, but many studies use PBMs that do not have appropriate value sets. Parent proxies are the most common respondents, but the focus group responses suggest it would be preferred, and may be more informative, for older children to self-report or for child–parent dyads to respond.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Ungar, W. J. (2009) Economic evaluation in child health. 1st edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Ungar, W. J. (2009) Economic evaluation in child health. 1st edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference De Civita, M., et al. (2005) Evaluating health-related quality-of-life studies in paediatric populations: Some conceptual, methodological and developmental considerations and recent applications. Pharmacoeconomics, 23(7), 659–685. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15987225 (Accessed 18 March 2016). De Civita, M., et al. (2005) Evaluating health-related quality-of-life studies in paediatric populations: Some conceptual, methodological and developmental considerations and recent applications. Pharmacoeconomics, 23(7), 659–685. Available at: http://​www.​ncbi.​nlm.​nih.​gov/​pubmed/​15987225 (Accessed 18 March 2016).
25.
go back to reference Scalone, L., et al. (2011) An investigation of suitability of EQ-5D-Y proxy version to assess health of children aged from 4 years, in J. Yfantapoulos (Ed.) 27th Scientific Plenary Meeting of the EuroQol Group. EuroQol Group, pp. 151–169. Scalone, L., et al. (2011) An investigation of suitability of EQ-5D-Y proxy version to assess health of children aged from 4 years, in J. Yfantapoulos (Ed.) 27th Scientific Plenary Meeting of the EuroQol Group. EuroQol Group, pp. 151–169.
Metadata
Title
Preference-based measures to obtain health state utility values for use in economic evaluations with child-based populations: a review and UK-based focus group assessment of patient and parent choices
Authors
Jane L. Wolstenholme
Danielle Bargo
Kay Wang
Anthony Harnden
Ulla Räisänen
Lucy Abel
Publication date
01-07-2018
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Quality of Life Research / Issue 7/2018
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1831-6

Other articles of this Issue 7/2018

Quality of Life Research 7/2018 Go to the issue

Special Section: Test Construction (by invitation only)

Fit for purpose and modern validity theory in clinical outcomes assessment