Cargando…

Calculating Utilities From the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire: A Necessity for Economic and Decision Analysis

General population utility valuation study. OBJECTIVE. The aim of this study was to develop a technique for calculating utilities from the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire v2.0 (SOSGOQ2.0). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. The ability to calculate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pahuta, Markian A., Fisk, Felicity, Versteeg, Anne L., Fisher, Charles G., Sahgal, Arjun, Gokaslan, Ziya L., Reynolds, Jeremy J., Laufer, Ilya, Lazary, Aron, Rhines, Laurence D., Boriani, Stefano, Bettegowda, Chetan, Dea, Nicolas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8357033/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34334684
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000003981
_version_ 1783737057757102080
author Pahuta, Markian A.
Fisk, Felicity
Versteeg, Anne L.
Fisher, Charles G.
Sahgal, Arjun
Gokaslan, Ziya L.
Reynolds, Jeremy J.
Laufer, Ilya
Lazary, Aron
Rhines, Laurence D.
Boriani, Stefano
Bettegowda, Chetan
Dea, Nicolas
author_facet Pahuta, Markian A.
Fisk, Felicity
Versteeg, Anne L.
Fisher, Charles G.
Sahgal, Arjun
Gokaslan, Ziya L.
Reynolds, Jeremy J.
Laufer, Ilya
Lazary, Aron
Rhines, Laurence D.
Boriani, Stefano
Bettegowda, Chetan
Dea, Nicolas
author_sort Pahuta, Markian A.
collection PubMed
description General population utility valuation study. OBJECTIVE. The aim of this study was to develop a technique for calculating utilities from the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire v2.0 (SOSGOQ2.0). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. The ability to calculate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for metastatic spine disease would enhance treatment decision-making and facilitate economic analysis. QALYs are calculated using utilities. METHODS. Using a hybrid concept-retention and factorial analysis shortening approach, we first shortened the SOSGOQ2.0 to eight items (SOSGOQ-8D). This was done to lessen the cognitive burden of the utility valuation exercise. A general population sample of 2730 adults was then asked to evaluate 12 choice sets based on SOSGOQ-8D health states in a Discrete Choice Experiment. A utility scoring rubric was then developed using a mixed multinomial-logit regression model. RESULTS. We were able to reduce the SOSGOQ2.0 to an SOSGOQ-8D with a mean error of 0.003 and mean absolute error of 3.078 compared to the full questionnaire. The regression model demonstrated good predictive performance and was used to develop a utility scoring rubric. Regression results revealed that participants did not regard all SOSGOQ-8D items as equally important. CONCLUSION. We provide a simple technique for converting the SOSGOQ2.0 to utilities. The ability to evaluate QALYs in metastatic spine disease will facilitate economic analysis and patient counseling. We also quantify the importance of individual SOSGOQ-8D items. Clinicians should heed these findings and offer treatments that maximize function in the most important items. Level of Evidence: 3
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8357033
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83570332021-08-18 Calculating Utilities From the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire: A Necessity for Economic and Decision Analysis Pahuta, Markian A. Fisk, Felicity Versteeg, Anne L. Fisher, Charles G. Sahgal, Arjun Gokaslan, Ziya L. Reynolds, Jeremy J. Laufer, Ilya Lazary, Aron Rhines, Laurence D. Boriani, Stefano Bettegowda, Chetan Dea, Nicolas Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Health Services Research General population utility valuation study. OBJECTIVE. The aim of this study was to develop a technique for calculating utilities from the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire v2.0 (SOSGOQ2.0). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. The ability to calculate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for metastatic spine disease would enhance treatment decision-making and facilitate economic analysis. QALYs are calculated using utilities. METHODS. Using a hybrid concept-retention and factorial analysis shortening approach, we first shortened the SOSGOQ2.0 to eight items (SOSGOQ-8D). This was done to lessen the cognitive burden of the utility valuation exercise. A general population sample of 2730 adults was then asked to evaluate 12 choice sets based on SOSGOQ-8D health states in a Discrete Choice Experiment. A utility scoring rubric was then developed using a mixed multinomial-logit regression model. RESULTS. We were able to reduce the SOSGOQ2.0 to an SOSGOQ-8D with a mean error of 0.003 and mean absolute error of 3.078 compared to the full questionnaire. The regression model demonstrated good predictive performance and was used to develop a utility scoring rubric. Regression results revealed that participants did not regard all SOSGOQ-8D items as equally important. CONCLUSION. We provide a simple technique for converting the SOSGOQ2.0 to utilities. The ability to evaluate QALYs in metastatic spine disease will facilitate economic analysis and patient counseling. We also quantify the importance of individual SOSGOQ-8D items. Clinicians should heed these findings and offer treatments that maximize function in the most important items. Level of Evidence: 3 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021-09-01 2021-07-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8357033/ /pubmed/34334684 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000003981 Text en Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
spellingShingle Health Services Research
Pahuta, Markian A.
Fisk, Felicity
Versteeg, Anne L.
Fisher, Charles G.
Sahgal, Arjun
Gokaslan, Ziya L.
Reynolds, Jeremy J.
Laufer, Ilya
Lazary, Aron
Rhines, Laurence D.
Boriani, Stefano
Bettegowda, Chetan
Dea, Nicolas
Calculating Utilities From the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire: A Necessity for Economic and Decision Analysis
title Calculating Utilities From the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire: A Necessity for Economic and Decision Analysis
title_full Calculating Utilities From the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire: A Necessity for Economic and Decision Analysis
title_fullStr Calculating Utilities From the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire: A Necessity for Economic and Decision Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Calculating Utilities From the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire: A Necessity for Economic and Decision Analysis
title_short Calculating Utilities From the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire: A Necessity for Economic and Decision Analysis
title_sort calculating utilities from the spine oncology study group outcomes questionnaire: a necessity for economic and decision analysis
topic Health Services Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8357033/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34334684
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000003981
work_keys_str_mv AT pahutamarkiana calculatingutilitiesfromthespineoncologystudygroupoutcomesquestionnaireanecessityforeconomicanddecisionanalysis
AT fiskfelicity calculatingutilitiesfromthespineoncologystudygroupoutcomesquestionnaireanecessityforeconomicanddecisionanalysis
AT versteegannel calculatingutilitiesfromthespineoncologystudygroupoutcomesquestionnaireanecessityforeconomicanddecisionanalysis
AT fishercharlesg calculatingutilitiesfromthespineoncologystudygroupoutcomesquestionnaireanecessityforeconomicanddecisionanalysis
AT sahgalarjun calculatingutilitiesfromthespineoncologystudygroupoutcomesquestionnaireanecessityforeconomicanddecisionanalysis
AT gokaslanziyal calculatingutilitiesfromthespineoncologystudygroupoutcomesquestionnaireanecessityforeconomicanddecisionanalysis
AT reynoldsjeremyj calculatingutilitiesfromthespineoncologystudygroupoutcomesquestionnaireanecessityforeconomicanddecisionanalysis
AT lauferilya calculatingutilitiesfromthespineoncologystudygroupoutcomesquestionnaireanecessityforeconomicanddecisionanalysis
AT lazaryaron calculatingutilitiesfromthespineoncologystudygroupoutcomesquestionnaireanecessityforeconomicanddecisionanalysis
AT rhineslaurenced calculatingutilitiesfromthespineoncologystudygroupoutcomesquestionnaireanecessityforeconomicanddecisionanalysis
AT borianistefano calculatingutilitiesfromthespineoncologystudygroupoutcomesquestionnaireanecessityforeconomicanddecisionanalysis
AT bettegowdachetan calculatingutilitiesfromthespineoncologystudygroupoutcomesquestionnaireanecessityforeconomicanddecisionanalysis
AT deanicolas calculatingutilitiesfromthespineoncologystudygroupoutcomesquestionnaireanecessityforeconomicanddecisionanalysis