What utility scores do mental health service users, healthcare professionals and members of the general public attribute to different health states? A co-produced mixed methods online survey

被引:3
|
作者
Flood, Chris [1 ,2 ]
Barlow, Sally [1 ,2 ]
Simpson, Alan [1 ,2 ]
Burls, Amanda [3 ]
Price, Amy [4 ]
Cartwright, Martin [3 ]
Brini, Stefano [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ London, Ctr Mental Hlth Res, Sch Hlth Sci, London, England
[2] East London NHS Fdn Trust, London, England
[3] Univ London, Ctr Hlth Serv Res, Sch Hlth Sci, London, England
[4] Univ Oxford, Dept Continuing Educ, Oxford, England
来源
PLOS ONE | 2018年 / 13卷 / 10期
关键词
TIME TRADE-OFF; STANDARD GAMBLE; VALUATION; VALIDITY; PATIENT; COPRODUCTION; PREFERENCES; DEPRESSION; DISABILITY;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0205223
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background Utility scores are integral to health economics decision-making. Typically, utility scores have not been scored or developed with mental health service users. The aims of this study were to i) collaborate with service users to develop descriptions of five mental health states (psychosis, depression, eating disorder, medication side effects and self-harm); ii) explore feasibility and acceptability of using scenario-based health states in an e-survey; iii) evaluate which utility measures (standard gamble (SG), time trade off (TTO) and rating scale (RS)) are preferred; and iv) determine how different participant groups discriminate between the health scenarios and rank them. Design and methods This was a co-produced mixed methods cross-sectional online survey. Utility scores were generated using the SG, TTO and RS methods; difficulty of the completing each method, markers of acceptability and participants' preference were also assessed. Results A total of 119 participants (58%) fully completed the survey. For any given health state, SG consistently generated higher utility scores compared to RS and for some health states higher also than TTO (i.e. SG produces inflated utility scores relative to RS and TTO). Results suggest that different utility measures produce different evaluations of described health states. The TTO was preferred by all participant groups over the SG. The three participant groups scored four (of five) health scenarios comparably. Psychosis scored as the worst health state to live with while medication side-effects were viewed more positively than other scenarios (depression, eating disorders, self-harm) by all participant groups. However, there was a difference in how the depression scenario was scored, with service users giving depression a lower utility score compared to other groups. Conclusion Mental health state scenarios used to generate utility scores can be co-produced and are well received by a broad range of participants. Utility valuations using SG, TTO and RS were feasible for use with service users, carers, healthcare professionals and members of the general public. Future studies of utility scores in psychiatry should aim to include mental health service users as both co-investigators and respondents.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 2 条
  • [1] Comparison of a co-produced mental health service to traditional services: A co-produced mixed-methods cross-sectional study
    Pocobello, Raffaella
    el Sehity, Tarek
    Negrogno, Luca
    Minervini, Carlo
    Guida, Maddalena
    Venerito, Cosimo
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MENTAL HEALTH NURSING, 2020, 29 (03) : 460 - 475
  • [2] Please do Something - no Matter what! A Nationwide Online Survey of Mental Health Service Users About the Use of Alternatives to Coercive Measures
    Heumann, Kolja
    Bock, Thomas
    Lincoln, Tania M.
    PSYCHIATRISCHE PRAXIS, 2017, 44 (02) : 85 - 92