Journal of pediatric urology · 2015
Utility scores for vesicoureteral reflux and anti-reflux surgery.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nelson Caleb P, Routh Jonathan C, Logvinenko Tanya, Rosoklija Ilina, Kokorowski Paul J, Prosser Lisa A, Schuster Mark A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Management of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) continues to be controversial. In conditions of uncertainty, decision analytic techniques such as cost-utility analysis (CUA) can help to structure the decision-making process. However, CUA analyses require a "utility," a value between 0 (death) and 1 (perfect health) corresponding to the quality of life associated with a health state. Ideally, utility values are elicited directly from representative community samples, but utilities have not been rigorously measured for pediatric urology conditions.
OBJECTIVES: To elicit utility scores for VUR and open anti-reflux surgery (ARS) from a representative, well-characterized community sample of adults who have been parents.
METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of nationally representative adults who had ever been parents. Each respondent saw one of four descriptions of VUR, with or without continuous antibiotic prophylaxis (CAP) and occurrence of febrile urinary tract infection (UTI). A 6-week postoperative health state following ARS was also assessed. We used the time trade-off (TTO) method to elicit utility scores. Factors associated with utility score were assessed with a multivariate linear regression model.
RESULTS: The survey was completed by 1200 individuals. Data were weighted to adjust for demographic differences between responders and non-responders. Mean age was 52 ± 15 years, 44% were male, and 68% were White. In terms of education, 29% had a college degree or higher. The mean utility score for VUR overall was 0.82 ± 0.28. VUR utility scores did not differ significantly based on inclusion of CAP or UTI in the health state description (p = 0.21). The 6-week postoperative period garnered a utility of 0.71 ± 0.43.
DISCUSSION: Our results showed that VUR has a mean utility score of 0.82, which indicates that the community perceives this condition to be a substantial burden. For comparison, conditions with similar utility scores include compensated hepatitis B-related cirrhosis (0.80) and glaucoma (0.82); conditions with higher utilities include neonatal jaundice (0.99) and transient neonatal neurological symptoms (0.95); and conditions with lower utility scores include severe depression (0.43) and major stroke (0.30). Our results suggest that parents consider the burden associated with VUR to be significant, and that the impact of the condition on families and children is substantial.
CONCLUSIONS: VUR is perceived as having a substantial impact on health-related quality of life, with a utility value of 0.82. However, use of CAP and occurrence of UTI do not seem to affect significantly the community perspective on HRQOL associated with living with VUR.
OBJECTIVES: To elicit utility scores for VUR and open anti-reflux surgery (ARS) from a representative, well-characterized community sample of adults who have been parents.
METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of nationally representative adults who had ever been parents. Each respondent saw one of four descriptions of VUR, with or without continuous antibiotic prophylaxis (CAP) and occurrence of febrile urinary tract infection (UTI). A 6-week postoperative health state following ARS was also assessed. We used the time trade-off (TTO) method to elicit utility scores. Factors associated with utility score were assessed with a multivariate linear regression model.
RESULTS: The survey was completed by 1200 individuals. Data were weighted to adjust for demographic differences between responders and non-responders. Mean age was 52 ± 15 years, 44% were male, and 68% were White. In terms of education, 29% had a college degree or higher. The mean utility score for VUR overall was 0.82 ± 0.28. VUR utility scores did not differ significantly based on inclusion of CAP or UTI in the health state description (p = 0.21). The 6-week postoperative period garnered a utility of 0.71 ± 0.43.
DISCUSSION: Our results showed that VUR has a mean utility score of 0.82, which indicates that the community perceives this condition to be a substantial burden. For comparison, conditions with similar utility scores include compensated hepatitis B-related cirrhosis (0.80) and glaucoma (0.82); conditions with higher utilities include neonatal jaundice (0.99) and transient neonatal neurological symptoms (0.95); and conditions with lower utility scores include severe depression (0.43) and major stroke (0.30). Our results suggest that parents consider the burden associated with VUR to be significant, and that the impact of the condition on families and children is substantial.
CONCLUSIONS: VUR is perceived as having a substantial impact on health-related quality of life, with a utility value of 0.82. However, use of CAP and occurrence of UTI do not seem to affect significantly the community perspective on HRQOL associated with living with VUR.