Mapping the Functional Independence Measure to a multi-attribute utility instrument for economic evaluations in rehabilitation: a secondary analysis of randomized controlled trial data

References

• Australasian Rehabilitation Outcomes Centre. The AROC annual report: the state of rehabilitation in Australia in 2014. Australian Health Services Research Institute, Wollongong (NSW): University of Wollongong; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. Report to Congress: Medicare payment policy. Washington (DC): MedPAC; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Appleby J. Crossing the line: NICE's value for money threshold. BMJ. 2016;352:i1336.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EuroQol Group. EuroQol – a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16:199–208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawthorne G, Richardson J. The assessment of quality of life (AQoL) instrument construction, initial validation and utility scaling. Working Paper 76. Melbourne: Centre for Health Program Evaluation; 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ. 2002;21:271–292.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Queensland Government. Implementing the Australian Paediatric Rehabilitation Outcome Registry. Brisbane: Clinical Excellence Division, Queensland Government; 2018. Available from: https://clinicalexcellence.qld.gov.au/improvement-exchange/paediatric-rehabilitation
   Google Scholar
• Doshi AJ, Glick HA, Polsky D. Analyses of cost data in economic evaluations conducted alongside randomized controlled trials. Int Soc Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res (ISPOR). 2006;9:334–340.
   Google Scholar
• Mortimer D, Segal L. Comparing the incomparable? A systematic review of competing techniques for mapping one health outcome measure into another. Med Decis Making. 2008;28:66–89.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brazier JE, Yang Y, Tsuchiya A, et al. A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures. Eur J Health Econ. 2010;11:215.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dakin H, Abel L, Burns R, et al. Review and critical appraisal of studies mapping from quality of life or clinical measures to EQ-5D: an online database and application of the MAPS statement. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018;16:31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor NF, Brusco NK, Watts JJ, et al. A study protocol of a randomised controlled trial incorporating a health economic analysis to investigate if additional allied health services for rehabilitation reduce length of stay without compromising patient outcomes. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;10:308.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peiris CL, Shields N, Brusco NK, et al. Additional Saturday rehabilitation improves functional independence and quality of life and reduces length of stay: a randomized controlled trial [Erratum appears in BMC Med. 2013;11:262]. BMC Med. 2013;11:198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brusco NK, Watts JJ, Shields N, et al. Is cost effectiveness sustained after weekend inpatient rehabilitation? 12 month follow up from a randomized controlled trial. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15:165.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charlson ME, Ales KA, Pompei P, et al. A new method of classification of prognostic comorbidity for longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chron Dis. 1987;40:373–383.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hamilton BB, Granger CV. Disability outcomes following inpatient rehabilitation for stroke. Phys Ther. 1994;74:494–503.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurst NP, Jobanputra P, Hunter M, et al. Validity of EuroQoL – a generic health status instrument – in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology. 1994;33:655–662.
   Google Scholar
• Dorman PJ, Waddell F, Slattery J, et al. Is the EuroQoL a valid measure of health-related quality of life after stroke? Stroke. 1997;28:1876–1882.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brusco NK, Shields N, Taylor NF, et al. A Saturday physiotherapy service may decrease length of stay in patients undergoing rehabilitation in hospital: a randomised controlled trial. Aust J Physiother. 2007;53:75–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prestmo A, Hagen G, Sletvold O, et al. Comprehensive geriatric care for patients with hip fracture: a perspective, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385:1623–1633.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glasgow Augmented Physiotherapy Study. Can augmented physiotherapy input enhance recovery of mobility after stroke? A randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2004;18:529–537.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Position statement on use of the EQ-5D-5L valuation set. London: NICE; 2017; [cited 2018 Jan 11]. Available from: www.nice.org.uk/Media/Default/About/what-we-do/NICE-guidance/NICE-technology-appraisal-guidance/eq5d5l_nice_position_statement.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ghislandi S, Apolone G, Garattini L, et al. Is EQ-5D a valid measure of HRQoL in patients with movement disorders? A comparison with SF-36 and FIM questionnaires. Eur J Health Econ. 2002;3:125–130.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chen P, Lin K-C, Liing R-J, et al. Validity, responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of EQ-5D-5L in stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation. Qual Life Res. 2016;25:1585–1596.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sakthong P, Charoenvisuthiwongs R, Shabunthom R. A comparison of EQ-5D index scores using the UK, US, and Japan preference weights in a Thai sample with type 2 diabetes. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008;6:71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQoL health states. Med Care. 1997;35:1095–1108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messina G, Rasimelli L, Bonavita C, et al. Which factors influence functional patients improvements during rehabilitation? Glob J Health Sci. 2014;6:74–81.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hernández Alava M, Wailoo AJ. Fitting adjusted limited dependent variable mixture models to EQ-5D. Stata J. 2015;15:737–750.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernández Alava M, Wailoo AJ, Ara R. Tails from the peak district: adjusted limited dependent variable mixture models of EQ-5D questionnaire health state utility values. Value Health. 2012;15:550–561.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perraillon MC, Tina Shih Y-C, Thisted RA. Predicting the EQ-5D-3L preference index from the SF-12 health survey in a national US sample: a finite mixture approach. Med Decis Making. 2015;35:888–901.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray LA, Hernández Alava M, Wailoo AJ. Development of methods for the mapping of utilities using mixture models: mapping the AQLQ-S to the EQ-5D-5L and the HUI3 in patients with asthma. Value Health. 2018;21:748–757.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters SJ, Brazier JE. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res. 2005;14:1523.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo N, Johnson J, Coons S. Using instrument-defined health state transitions to estimate minimally important differences for four preference-based health-related quality of life instruments. Med Care. 2010;48:365–371.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghatnekar O, Eriksson M, Glader E. Mapping health outcome measures from a stroke registry to EQ-5D weights. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11:34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rundell S, Bresnahan B, Heagerty P, et al. Mapping a patient-reported functional outcome measure to a utility measure for comparative effectiveness and economic evaluations in older adults with low back pain. Med Decis Making. 2014;34:873–883.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar