Quality of life in cochlear implantees: Comparing utility values obtained through the Medical Outcome Study Short‐Form Survey‐6D and the Health Utility Index Mark 3

Arnoldner, Christoph; Lin, Vincent; Bresler, Richard; Kaider, Alexandra; Kuthubutheen, Jafri; Shipp, David; Chen, Joseph M.

doi:10.1002/lary.24648

Cited by 29 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…40 In the present study, the HUI3 OU difference 1 year post-CI was of 0.21, which indicates a large-scale positive change. The same difference in previous studies was of 0.117, 41 0.15 42 and 0.17. 39 Interestingly, not only were the hearing single-attribute (HUI3 HU) and multi-attribute scores (HUI3 OU) significantly improved, but the single-attribute scores of pain (HUI3 PU) and emotion (HUI3 EU) were also improved, as previously described.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

The Outcome of Unilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adults: Speech Recognition, Health-Related Quality of Life and Level of Anxiety and Depression: a One- and Three-Year Follow-Up Study

Bergman

Lyxell

Harder³

et al. 2019

Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Hearing impairment is a common disease worldwide, with a comprehensive impact, and cochlear implantation (CI) is an intervention for profound hearing impairment. Objective To study the outcome one and three years after unilateral CI on hearing, health-related quality of life and level of depression and anxiety, and the correlation between the outcomes. Second, to study whether age, gender, etiology, operated side, residual hearing or cognitive performance can predict the outcome. Methods A prospective longitudinal study including adults with profound postlingual hearing impairment, with respect to hearing (speech recognition), health-related quality of life (Health Utilities Index 3) and level of depression and anxiety (Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale), pre-CI, and one and three years post-CI. The total sample was composed of 40 participants (40% of men), with a mean age of 71 years. Results Speech recognition and the overall health-related quality of life improved one year post-CI (p = 0.000), without correlation (ρ= 0.27), and with no difference three years post-CI. The hearing attribute (in the health-related quality of life instrument) improved one and three years post-CI (p = 0.000). The level of anxiety did not change one and three years post-CI. The level of depression improved one year post-CI (p = 0.036), and deteriorated three years post-CI (p = 0.031). Age, etiology, operated side, residual hearing and cognitive performance did not predict the outcome, but the female gender did significantly improve speech recognition compared with men (p = 0.009). Conclusion The CI significantly improved speech recognition, health-related quality of life and level of depression one year post-CI without mutual correlation, and women performed significantly better than men. There were no further improvements three years post-CI, apart from the hearing attribute.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

The Outcome of Unilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adults: Speech Recognition, Health-Related Quality of Life and Level of Anxiety and Depression: a One- and Three-Year Follow-Up Study

Bergman

Lyxell

Harder³

et al. 2019

Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The EQ‐5D scores did not differ after implantation. Our finding that there is disagreement between health utility instruments is consistent with previous studies on health utility instruments in cochlear implantation …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This in contrast to one of the previous studies, where a scenario‐based method was used . Another strength is that we performed more extensive statistical analyses than other studies in this field to thoroughly assess the agreement between the various health utility instruments . We performed multiple analyses (Wilcoxon signed‐rank test, ICC, Bland Altman plots) and a sensitivity analysis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Agreement between health utility instruments in cochlear implantation

Ramakers

Smulders

Zon

et al. 2016

Clinical Otolaryngology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given the exponentially increasing costs of medical care in the United States and abroad, there has been growing interest in evaluating health utility across medical specialties . Health utility values have been measured for a variety of conditions within otolaryngology, including head and neck cancer, facial paralysis, hearing loss, and chronic rhinosinusitis . Within laryngology, where surgical therapies often affect quality of life rather than life span, there is increasing focus on assessing the cost‐effectiveness of laryngeal surgery .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The health utility of mild and severe dysphonia

DeVore

Shrime

Wittenberg³

et al. 2019

The Laryngoscope

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives/Hypothesis: The impact of disease states can be measured using health state utilities, which are values that reflect economic preferences for health outcomes. Utilities for dysphonia have not been studied using direct methods. The objective of this project was to establish the baseline health utilities of mild and severe dysphonia from a societal perspective.Study Design: Direct utility elicitation survey. Methods: Four health states (monocular blindness, binocular blindness, mild dysphonia, and severe dysphonia) were evaluated by a convenience sample of adults recruited from the general public with three computer-aided estimation techniques (visual analog scale [VAS], standard gamble [SG], and time trade-off [TTO]). Standardized descriptions and voice recordings from multiple dysphonic patients were employed. Perfect health was defined as a utility of 1, with death 0. Analysis of variance with post hoc pairwise comparison was used to calculate significant differences between health states.Results: Three hundred participants were surveyed, and 225 (75.0%) responses met quality thresholds. Severe dysphonia (VAS = 48.3, SG = 0.810, TTO = 0.798) was valued significantly worse than monocular blindness (VAS = 56.2, SG = 0.834, TTO = 0.839) on the VAS (P < .001) and equivalent on SG and TTO; it was preferred over binocular blindness (VAS = 25.7, SG = 0.631, TTO = 0.622; P < .001) with all methods. Mild dysphonia evaluated favorably with all methods to the other health states (VAS = 78.5, SG = 0.902, TTO = 0.908; P < .001).Conclusions: Voice disorders may have a measurable impact on utility, with severe dysphonia valued equivalently to monocular blindness. Mild dysphonia has a utility decrement from perfect health. These estimates are critical for quality-of-life assessment and could be used to assess cost-effectiveness of treatments for voice disorders.

show abstract

Quality of life in cochlear implantees: Comparing utility values obtained through the Medical Outcome Study Short‐Form Survey‐6D and the Health Utility Index Mark 3

Abstract: 4

Cited by 29 publications

References 34 publications

The Outcome of Unilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adults: Speech Recognition, Health-Related Quality of Life and Level of Anxiety and Depression: a One- and Three-Year Follow-Up Study

The Outcome of Unilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adults: Speech Recognition, Health-Related Quality of Life and Level of Anxiety and Depression: a One- and Three-Year Follow-Up Study

Agreement between health utility instruments in cochlear implantation

The health utility of mild and severe dysphonia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About