Search

Introduction: Quality of life is included in the economic evaluation of health services by measuring the preference for health states, i.e. health state utilities. However, most intervention studies include a disease-specific, not a utility, instrument. Consequently, there has been increasing use of statistical mapping algorithms which permit utilities to be estimated from a disease-specific instrument. The present paper provides such algorithms between the MacNew Heart Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire (MacNew) instrument and six multi-attribute utility (MAU) instruments, the Euroqol (EQ-5D), the Short Form 6D (SF-6D), the Health Utilities Index (HUI) 3, the Quality of Wellbeing (QWB), the 15D (15 Dimension) and the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL-8D). Methods: Heart disease patients and members of the healthy public were recruited from six countries. Non-parametric rank tests were used to compare subgroup utilities and MacNew scores. Mapping algorithms were estimated using three separate statistical techniques. Results: Mapping algorithms achieved a high degree of precision. Based on the mean absolute error and the intra class correlation the preferred mapping is MacNew into SF-6D or 15D. Using the R squared statistic the preferred mapping is MacNew into AQoL-8D. Implications for research: The algorithms reported in this paper enable MacNew data to be mapped into utilities predicted from any of six instruments. This permits studies which have included the MacNew to be used in cost utility analyses which, in turn, allows the comparison of services with interventions across the health system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To formally evaluate the written discharge advice for people with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Methods: Eleven publications met the inclusion criteria: (1) intended for adults; (2) ≤two A4 pages; (3) published in English; (4) freely accessible; and (5) currently used (or suitable for use) in Australian hospital emergency departments or similar settings. Two independent raters evaluated the content and style of each publication against established standards. The readability of the publication, the diagnostic term(s) contained in it and a modified Patient Literature Usefulness Index (mPLUI) were also evaluated. Results: The mean content score was 19.18 ± 8.53 (maximum = 31) and the mean style score was 6.8 ± 1.34 (maximum = 8). The mean Flesch-Kincaid reading ease score was 66.42 ± 4.3. The mean mPLUI score was 65.86 ± 14.97 (maximum = 100). Higher scores on these metrics indicate more desirable properties. Over 80% of the publications used mixed diagnostic terminology. One publication scored optimally on two of the four metrics and highly on the others. Discussion: The content, style, readability and usefulness of written mTBI discharge advice was highly variable. The provision of written information to patients with mTBI is advised, but this variability in materials highlights the need for evaluation before distribution. Areas are identified to guide the improvement of written mTBI discharge advice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]