J L Bosch — Page 4 | PubMed Health

PubMedDate not supplied

Estimating general-population utilities using one binary-gamble question per respondent.

This study used a single binary-gamble question per health state per respondent to obtain societal preferences for the health states intermittent claudication and major amputation and compare those with Health Utilities Indices obtained from patients, to test the feasibility of this method, and to investigate whether the utility depends on the presentation of a vignette as generic vs disease-specific. A random sample of the general U.S. population (n = 1,003) was randomly divided into ten subgroups. In telephone interviews, subjects answered one binary-gamble question in a standard-gamble format for each of two health states. The risks of death varied across subgroups but not between health states. Mean utility was estimated by the area above the proportional distribution of responses indicating acceptance of the gamble. The method is based on the binary-choice method used in contingent-valuation studies of willingness to pay. The health states were alternatively described by generic and disease-specific vignettes in two subsamples. The results suggest that the binary-gamble question can be used to obtain societal preferences for health states, and that disease-specific descriptions yield lower utilities compared with generic descriptions of health states.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Time-tradeoff values and standard-gamble utilities assessed during telephone interviews versus face-to-face interviews.

The purpose of this study was to compare time-tradeoff values and standard-gamble utilities obtained during telephone interviews with those obtained through face-to-face interviews. Sixty-five patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease completed both interviews. One week prior to the telephone interview, the patients received by mail a questionnaire in which the value and utility measures were presented in writing. The face-to-face interviews used the same questions, but the interviewer used visual aids. The mean time-tradeoff values were 0.84 (SD 0.20) vs 0.86 (SD 0.17) for the telephone and face-to-face interviews, respectively (p = 0.31). The mean standard-gamble utilities were 0.93 (SD 0.16) vs 0.92 (SD 0.17) for the telephone and face-to-face interviews, respectively (p = 0.26). In conclusion, telephone interviews yield similar time-tradeoff values and standard-gamble utilities compared with face-to-face interviews, suggesting that telephone interviews can replace face-to-face interviews.

Adult↗