Search

Purpose: Different health state utility (HSU) instruments produce different utilities for the same individuals, thereby compromising the intended comparability of economic evaluations of health care interventions. When developing crosswalks, previous studies have indicated nonlinear relationships. This paper inquires into the degree of nonlinearity across the four most widely used HSU-instruments and proposes exchange rates that differ depending on the severity levels of the health state utility scale.Methods: Overall, 7933 respondents from six countries, 1760 in a non-diagnosed healthy group and 6173 in seven disease groups, reported their health states using four different instruments: EQ-5D-5L, SF-6D, HUI-3 and 15D. Quantile regressions investigate the degree of nonlinear relationships between these instruments. To compare the instruments across different disease severities, we split the health state utility scale into utility intervals with 0.2 successive decrements in utility starting from perfect health at 1.00. Exchange rates (ERs) are calculated as the mean utility difference between two utility intervals on one HSU-instrument divided by the difference in mean utility on another HSU-instrument.Results: Quantile regressions reveal significant nonlinear relationships across all four HSU-instruments. The degrees of nonlinearities differ, with a maximum degree of difference in the coefficients along the health state utility scale of 3.34 when SF-6D is regressed on EQ-5D. At the lower end of the health state utility scale, the exchange rate from SF-6D to EQ-5D is 2.11, whilst at the upper end it is 0.38.Conclusion: Comparisons at different utility levels illustrate the fallacy of using linear functions as crosswalks between HSU-instruments. The existence of nonlinear relationships between different HSU-instruments suggests that level-specific exchange rates should be used when converting a change in utility on the instrument used, onto a corresponding utility change had another instrument been used. Accounting for nonlinearities will increase the validity of the comparison for decision makers when faced with a choice between interventions whose calculations of QALY gains have been based on different HSU-instruments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peer support groups have been an increasingly popular way of limiting the adverse effects of life with a chronic illness for adolescents although few groups have been rigorously evaluated. This paper reports the findings of a realistic evaluation of a hospital based peer support program Chronic Illness Peer Support (ChIPS), in Sydney, Australia. We collected qualitative interview and focus group data from four participant groups; new ChIPS members, their parents, older members who had been in ChIPS for two or more years, and ChIPS co-ordinators past and present. Results of qualitative data have been aggregated and organised into three categories; program attendance: getting in and staying in; program outcomes for young people: personal growth and development; and social connection. Questionnaires were also administered to fourteen new ChIPS members but no significant changes in distress or self-esteem were recorded between the beginning and the end of the short study period. The ChIPS Introductory Program fulfilled its aim, entering young people with chronic illness into the peer support program. There was evidence of initial personal growth and development in those young people, with potential for enhanced social connection from ongoing participation in ChIPS activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]