Search

Objective: Cost-utility analysis is increasingly important as healthcare providers aim to invest scarce resources in interventions offering the greatest health benefit. The ability to attach utility values to health states is essential, and is increasingly performed using generic scales. However, the evidence regarding the validity of generic utility scales in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is unclear. We summarize and review evidence on the validity and comparative performance of generic utility scales in RA., Methods: We searched the English-language medical literature for studies using utilities in RA between 1980 and mid-2006. Reports describing primary evidence of the validity or performance of a generic utility scale in RA were selected, summarized, and reviewed using the OMERACT filter., Results: In total 923 articles were identified, of which 228 reported the use of utility scales in RA; 26 studies related to the validation or evidence of generic utility scales in RA, the EQ-5D, Health Utility Index-2 (HUI2) and HUI3, SF-6D, and Quality of Well-Being Scale. The EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3, and SF-6D all have consistent evidence of construct validity and responsiveness in RA, but each has limitations., Conclusion: The EQ-5D and HUI3 have been the most extensively studied instruments and show validity and responsiveness for use in RA, but both instruments have limitations. The SF-6D is relatively new and appears to have potential for use in milder RA, but needs further evaluation. More longitudinal head-to-head evaluation of measures is needed across the spectrum of RA disease severity to further investigate their comparative properties, and to seek consensus on the best utility measure for use in economic evaluation.

Objective: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with lower socioeconomic status (SES) are known to have more severe disease, more comorbidity, and higher mortality. It is not known whether SES influences response to treatment in RA. We examined the relationship between area of residence (as a surrogate for SES) and baseline outcome measures and response to treatment, using data from the British Rheumatoid Outcome Study Group randomized controlled trial of aggressive versus symptomatic treatment of long-standing, stable RA., Methods: A total of 466 patients from 5 centers were recruited to the trial. Baseline data included age, sex, smoking status, and comorbidity. Patients were assigned a Townsend score (a measure of social deprivation) according to their area of residence. Outcome measures including the Disease Activity Score (DAS28), Health Assessment Questionnaire, Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36, and EuroQol (EQ5D) were recorded at the beginning and end of the 3 year trial. The baseline, 3 year values, and change data were examined by Townsend quintile adjusting for each treatment arm., Results: Significant relationships between increasing social deprivation by area of residence and higher disease activity, higher pain, poorer physical function, poorer emotional aspects of mental health, and lower quality of life were found at baseline (adjusted for age, sex, disease duration, current smoking, treatment center, and treatment group). During the 3 year trial period, patients from the most deprived areas showed greater improvement, with statistically significant greater improvement on DAS28 (p = 0.041) and 28 tender joint count (p = 0.015)., Conclusion: Area of residence is related to the severity of RA at recruitment and is a predictor of response in a clinical trial situation. The results suggest that measures of SES should be recorded for patients enrolled in clinical trials, longitudinal observational studies, and in the clinical setting.