Quantifying the contribution of utility cycling to population levels of physical activity: an analysis of the Active People Survey

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Can Social Care Needs and Well-Being Be Explained by the EQ-5D? Analysis of the Health Survey for England

BACKGROUND

The recent shift to an integrated approach to health and social care aims to provide cohesive support to those who are in need of care, but raises a challenge for resource allocation decision making, in particular for comparison of diverse benefits from different types of care across the two sectors.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the relationship of social care needs and well-being with a generic health status measure using multivariate regression.

METHODS

We empirically compared responses to health and well-being measures and social care needs from a cross-sectional data set of the general population (the Health Survey for England). Multivariate regression analyses were conducted to examine whether social care needs measured by the Barthel index can be explained by health status as captured by the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D) and two well-being measures-the Warwick Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS) and the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12).

RESULTS

Our study found that poor overall scores for EuroQol visual analogue scale, EQ-5D index, GHQ-12, and WEMWBS indicated a need for social care. Investigation of the dimensions found that the EQ-5D dimensions self-care and pain/discomfort were statistically significantly associated with the need for social care. Two dimensions of the WEMWBS ("been feeling useful" and "had energy to spare") were statistically significantly associated with the Barthel index, but none of the GHQ-12 dimensions were.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that the need for social care, which is dependent on the ability to perform personal day-to-day activities, is more closely related to the EQ-5D dimensions than the well-being measures WEMWBS and GHQ-12.

A utility of model input uncertainty analysis in transferring tobacco control-related economic evidence to countries with scarce resources: results from the EQUIPT study

AIMS

To inform the transferability of tobacco control-related economic evidence to resource-poor countries.

METHODS

We ran a univariate sensitivity analysis on a return on investment (ROI) model, the European study on Quantifying Utility of Investment in Protection from Tobacco model (EQUIPTMOD), to identify key input values to which the ROI estimates were sensitive. The EQUIPTMOD used a Markov-based state transition model to estimate the ROI of several tobacco control interventions in five European countries (England, Germany, Spain, Hungary and the Netherlands). Base case ROI estimates were obtained through average values of model inputs (throughout the five countries), which were then replaced one at a time with country-specific values. Tornado diagrams were used to evaluate the significance of sensitivity, defined as a ≥ 10% difference in ROI estimates from the base case estimates.

RESULTS

The ROI estimates were sensitive to 18 (of 46) input values. Examples of model inputs to which ROI estimates were sensitive included: smoking rate, costs of smoking-related diseases (e.g. lung cancer) and general population attributes.

CONCLUSION

Countries that have limited research time and other resources can adapt EQUIPTMOD to their own settings by choosing to collect data on a small number of model inputs. EQUIPTMOD can therefore facilitate transfer of tobacco control related economic evidence to new jurisdictions.

Estimates of costs for modelling return on investment from smoking cessation interventions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Modelling return on investment (ROI) from smoking cessation interventions requires estimates of their costs and benefits. This paper describes a standardized method developed to source both economic costs of tobacco smoking and costs of implementing cessation interventions for a Europe-wide ROI model [European study on Quantifying Utility of Investment in Protection from Tobacco model (EQUIPTMOD)].

DESIGN

Focused search of administrative and published data. A standardized checklist was developed in order to ensure consistency in methods of data collection.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Adult population (15+ years) in Hungary, Netherlands, Germany, Spain and England. For passive smoking-related costs, child population (0-15 years) was also included.

MEASUREMENTS

Costs of treating smoking-attributable diseases; productivity losses due to smoking-attributable absenteeism; and costs of implementing smoking cessation interventions.

FINDINGS

Annual costs (per case) of treating smoking attributable lung cancer were between €5074 (Hungary) and €52 106 (Germany); coronary heart disease between €1521 (Spain) and €3955 (Netherlands); chronic obstructive pulmonary disease between €1280 (England) and €4199 (Spain); stroke between €1829 (Hungary) and €14 880 (Netherlands). Costs (per recipient) of smoking cessation medications were estimated to be: for standard duration of varenicline between €225 (England) and €465 (Hungary); for bupropion between €25 (Hungary) and €220 (Germany). Costs (per recipient) of providing behavioural support were also wide-ranging: one-to-one behavioural support between €34 (Hungary) and €474 (Netherlands); and group-based behavioural support between €12 (Hungary) and €257 (Germany). The costs (per recipient) of delivering brief physician advice were: €24 (England); €9 (Germany); €4 (Hungary); €33 (Netherlands); and €27 (Spain).

CONCLUSIONS

Costs of treating smoking-attributable diseases as well as the costs of implementing smoking cessation interventions vary substantially across Hungary, Netherlands, Germany, Spain and England. Estimates for the costs of these diseases and interventions can contribute to return on investment estimates in support of national or regional policy decisions.

Estimates of effectiveness and reach for 'return on investment' modelling of smoking cessation interventions using data from England

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Estimating 'return on investment' (ROI) from smoking cessation interventions requires reach and effectiveness parameters for interventions for use in economic models such as the EQUIPT ROI tool (http://roi.equipt.eu). This paper describes the derivation of these parameter estimates for England that can be adapted to create ROI models for use by other countries.

METHODS

Estimates were derived for interventions in terms of their reach and effectiveness in: (1) promoting quit attempts and (2) improving the success of quit attempts (abstinence for at least 12 months). The sources were systematic reviews of efficacy supplemented by individual effectiveness evaluations and national surveys.

FINDINGS

Quit attempt rates were estimated to be increased by the following percentages (with reach in parentheses): 20% by tax increases raising the cost of smoking 5% above the cost of living index (100%); 10% by enforced comprehensive indoor public smoking bans (100%); 3% by mass media campaigns achieving 400 gross rating points (100%); 40% by brief opportunistic physician advice (21%); and 110% by use of a licensed nicotine product to reduce cigarette consumption (12%). Quit success rates were estimated to be increased by the following ratios: 60% by single-form nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (5%); 114% by NRT patch plus a faster-acting NRT (2%);124% by prescribed varenicline (5%); 60% by bupropion (1%); 100% by nortriptyline (0%), 10) 298% by cytisine (0%); 40% by individual face-to-face behavioural support (2%); 37% by telephone support (0.5%); 88% by group behavioural support (1%); 63% by text messaging (0.5%); and 19% by printed self-help materials (1%). There was insufficient evidence to obtain reliable, country-specific estimates for interventions such as websites, smartphone applications and e-cigarettes.

CONCLUSIONS

Tax increases, indoor smoking bans, brief opportunistic physician advice and use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smoking reduction can all increase population quit attempt rates. Quit success rates can be increased by provision of NRT, varenicline, bupropion, nortriptyline, cytisine and behavioural support delivered through a variety of modalities. Parameter estimates for the effectiveness and reach of these interventions can contribute to return on investment estimates in support of national or regional policy decisions.

Development and application of an economic model (EQUIPTMOD) to assess the impact of smoking cessation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although clear benefits are associated with reducing smoking, there is increasing pressure on public health providers to justify investment in tobacco control measures. Decision-makers need tools to assess the Return on Investment (ROI)/cost-effectiveness of programmes. The EQUIPT project adapted an ROI tool for England to four European countries (Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and Hungary). EQUIPTMOD, the economic model at the core of the ROI tool, is designed to assess the efficiency of packages of smoking cessation interventions. The objective of this paper is to describe the methods for EQUIPTMOD and identify key outcomes associated with continued and cessation of smoking.

METHODS

EQUIPTMOD uses a Markov model to estimate life-time costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and life years associated with a current and former smoker. It uses population data on smoking prevalence, disease prevalence, mortality and the impact of smoking combined with associated costs and utility effects of disease. To illustrate the tool's potential, costs, QALYs and life expectancy were estimated for the average current smoker for five countries based on the assumptions that they continue and that they cease smoking over the next 12 months. Costs and effects were discounted at country-specific rates.

RESULTS

For illustration, over a life-time horizon, not quitting smoking within the next 12 months in England will reduce life expectancy by 0.66, reduce QALYs by 1.09 and result in £4961 higher disease-related health care costs than if the smoker ceased smoking in the next 12 months. For all age-sex categories, costs were lower and QALYs higher for those who quit smoking in the 12 months than those who continued.

CONCLUSIONS

EQUIPTMOD facilitates assessment of the cost effectiveness of smoking cessation strategies. The demonstrated results indicate large potential benefits from smoking cessation at both an individual and population level.

Assessment of cost-effective changes to the current and potential provision of smoking cessation services: an analysis based on the EQUIPTMOD

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Increasing the reach of smoking cessation services and/or including new but effective medications to the current provision may provide significant health and economic benefits; the scale of such benefits is currently unknown. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness from a health-care perspective of viable national level changes in smoking cessation provision in the Netherlands and England.

METHODS

A Markov-based state transition model [European study on Quantifying Utility of Investment in Protection from Tobacco model (EQUIPTMOD)] was used to estimate costs and benefits [expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALY)] of changing the current provision of smoking cessation programmes in the Netherlands and England. The changes included: (a) increasing the reach of top-level services to increase potential quitters (e.g. brief physician advice); (b) increasing the reach of behavioural support (group-based therapy and SMS text-messaging support) to increase the success rates; (c) including a new but effective medication (cytisine); and (d) all changes implemented together (combined change). The costs and QALYs generated by those changes over 2, 5, 10 years and a life-time were compared with that of the current practice in each country. Results were expressed as incremental net benefit (INB) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). A sequential analysis from a life-time perspective was conducted to identify the optimal change.

RESULTS

The combined change was dominant (cost-saving) over all alternative changes and over the current practice, in both countries. The combined change would generate an incremental net benefit of €11.47 (2 years) to €56.16 (life-time) per smoker in the Netherlands and €9.96 (2 years) to €60.72 (life-time) per smoker in England. The current practice was dominated by all alternative changes.

CONCLUSION

Current provision of smoking cessation services in the Netherlands and England can benefit economically from the inclusion of cytisine and increasing the reach of brief physician advice, text-messaging support and group-based therapy.

Cost-effectiveness of increasing the reach of smoking cessation interventions in Germany: results from the EQUIPTMOD

AIMS

To evaluate costs, effects and cost-effectiveness of increased reach of specific smoking cessation interventions in Germany.

DESIGN

A Markov-based state transition return on investment model (EQUIPTMOD) was used to evaluate current smoking cessation interventions as well as two prospective investment scenarios. A health-care perspective (extended to include out-of-pocket payments) with life-time horizon was considered. A probabilistic analysis was used to assess uncertainty concerning predicted estimates.

SETTING

Germany.

PARTICIPANTS

Cohort of current smoking population (18+ years) in Germany.

INTERVENTIONS

Interventions included group-based behavioural support, financial incentive programmes and varenicline. For prospective scenario 1 the reach of group-based behavioral support, financial incentive programme and varenicline was increased by 1% of yearly quit attempts (= 57 915 quit attempts), while prospective scenario 2 represented a higher reach, mirroring the levels observed in England.

MEASUREMENTS

EQUIPTMOD considered reach, intervention cost, number of quitters, quality-of-life years (QALYs) gained, cost-effectiveness and return on investment.

FINDINGS

The highest returns through reduction in smoking-related health-care costs were seen for the financial incentive programme (€2.71 per €1 invested), followed by that of group-based behavioural support (€1.63 per €1 invested), compared with no interventions. Varenicline had lower returns (€1.02 per €1 invested) than the other two interventions. At the population level, prospective scenario 1 led to 15 034 QALYs gained and €27 million cost-savings, compared with current investment. Intervention effects and reach contributed most to the uncertainty around the return-on-investment estimates. At a hypothetical willingness-to-pay threshold of only €5000, the probability of being cost-effective is approximately 75% for prospective scenario 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing the reach of group-based behavioural support, financial incentives and varenicline for smoking cessation by just 1% of current annual quit attempts provides a strategy to German policymakers that improves the population's health outcomes and that may be considered cost-effective.

Cost-effectiveness of alternative smoking cessation scenarios in Spain: results from the EQUIPTMOD

AIMS

To assess the cost-effectiveness of alternative smoking cessation scenarios from the perspective of the Spanish National Health Service (NHS).

DESIGN

We used the European study on Quantifying Utility of Investment in Protection from Tobacco model (EQUIPTMOD), a Markov-based state transition economic model, to estimate the return on investment (ROI) of: (a) the current provision of smoking cessation services (brief physician advice and printed self-helped material + smoking ban and tobacco duty at current levels); and (b) four alternative scenarios to complement the current provision: coverage of proactive telephone calls; nicotine replacement therapy (mono and combo) [prescription nicotine replacement therapy (Rx NRT)]; varenicline (standard duration); or bupropion. A rate of 3% was used to discount life-time costs and benefits.

SETTING

Spain.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult smoking population (16+ years).

MEASUREMENTS

Health-care costs associated with treatment of smoking attributable diseases (lung cancer, coronary heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary infection and stroke); intervention costs; quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs and outcomes were summarized using various ROI estimates.

FINDINGS

The cost of implementing the current provision of smoking cessation services is approximately €61 million in the current year. This translates to 18 quitters per 1000 smokers and a life-time benefit-cost ratio of 5, compared with no such provision. All alternative scenarios were dominant (cost-saving: less expensive to run and generated more QALYs) from the life-time perspective, compared with the current provision. The life-time benefit-cost ratios were: 1.87 (proactive telephone calls); 1.17 (Rx NRT); 2.40 (varenicline-standard duration); and bupropion (2.18). The results remained robust in the sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the EQUIPTMOD modelling tool it would be cost-effective for the Spanish authorities to expand the reach of existing GP brief interventions for smoking cessation, provide pro-active telephone support, and reimburse smoking cessation medication to smokers trying to stop. Such policies would more than pay for themselves in the long run.

Cost-effectiveness of possible future smoking cessation strategies in Hungary: results from the EQUIPTMOD

AIMS

To evaluate potential health and economic returns from implementing smoking cessation interventions in Hungary.

METHODS

The EQUIPTMOD, a Markov-based economic model, was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of three implementation scenarios: (a) introducing a social marketing campaign; (b) doubling the reach of existing group-based behavioural support therapies and proactive telephone support; and (c) a combination of the two scenarios. All three scenarios were compared with current practice. The scenarios were chosen as feasible options available for Hungary based on the outcome of interviews with local stakeholders. Life-time costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated from a health-care perspective. The analyses used various return on investment (ROI) estimates, including incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), to compare the scenarios. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses assessed the extent to which the estimated mean ICERs were sensitive to the model input values.

RESULTS

Introducing a social marketing campaign resulted in an increase of 0.3014 additional quitters per 1 000 smokers, translating to health-care cost-savings of €0.6495 per smoker compared with current practice. When the value of QALY gains was considered, cost-savings increased to €14.1598 per smoker. Doubling the reach of existing group-based behavioural support therapies and proactive telephone support resulted in health-care savings of €0.2539 per smoker (€3.9620 with the value of QALY gains), compared with current practice. The respective figures for the combined scenario were €0.8960 and €18.0062. Results were sensitive to model input values.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the EQUIPTMOD modelling tool, it would be cost-effective for the Hungarian authorities introduce a social marketing campaign and double the reach of existing group-based behavioural support therapies and proactive telephone support. Such policies would more than pay for themselves in the long term.

Is it cost-effective to provide internet-based interventions to complement the current provision of smoking cessation services in the Netherlands? An analysis based on the EQUIPTMOD

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The cost-effectiveness of internet-based smoking cessation interventions is difficult to determine when they are provided as a complement to current smoking cessation services. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of such an alternate package compared with existing smoking cessation services alone (current package).

METHODS

A literature search was conducted to identify internet-based smoking cessation interventions in the Netherlands. A meta-analysis was then performed to determine the pooled effectiveness of a (web-based) computer-tailored intervention. The mean cost of implementing internet based interventions was calculated using available information, while intervention reach was sourced from an English study. We used EQUIPTMOD, a Markov-based state-transition model, to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios [expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained] for different time horizons to assess the value of providing internet-based interventions to complement the current package.). Deterministic sensitivity analyses tested the uncertainty around intervention costs per smoker, relative risks, and the intervention reach.

RESULTS

Internet-based interventions had an estimated pooled relative risk of 1.40; average costs per smoker of €2.71; and a reach of 0.41% of all smokers. The alternate package (i.e. provision of internet-based intervention to the current package) was dominant (cost-saving) compared with the current package alone (0.14 QALY gained per 1000 smokers; reduced health-care costs of €602.91 per 1000 smokers for the life-time horizon). The alternate package remained dominant in all sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

Providing internet-based smoking cessation interventions to complement the current provision of smoking cessation services could be a cost-saving policy option in the Netherlands.

An examination of user costs in relation to smokers using a cessation service based in the UK

BACKGROUND

Smoking cessation services provide support to smokers who desire to quit. Published studies to date have looked at the cost and benefit of service provision but typically focus on clinical trial data. Using routinely collected observational data, this study examined the costs involved in providing a service in terms of average health care expenditure per successful quit attempt in addition to population - level cost-effectiveness measures.

METHODS

Data were analysed from Quit-51 smoking cessation service across five English regions between March 2013 and March 2016 (n = 9116). For each user, costs were estimated in relation to: (i) time spent with advisers; (ii) prescription of pharmacotherapy. The total costs compared against self-reported quit at 12 weeks, which represents the time period for which the service is offered. Cost per quit (CPQ), with 95% confidence interval (CI), was calculated by relating total expenditure to the number of quitters, firstly for the whole dataset and then by subgroups of key categorical variables, namely; gender, age group, the Fagerstrom test for nicotine dependence (FTND) and Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD). Confidence intervals (CIs) for the mean estimates were derived using a non-parametric bootstrap procedure. Parameters derived from the calculation in relation to treatment were used to estimate potential long-term population outcomes under a scenario where the Quit 51 prescription was rolled out nationally.

RESULTS

The overall mean CPQ for this sample as estimated at 12 weeks was £403.51 (95% CI = £393.36 to £413.76). The estimated CPQs at this time point were comparable for those aged 12-19 (£423.56, 95% CI = £369.45 to £492.60) and those aged 20-29 (£430.76, 95% CI = £395.95 to £470.56). Differences were also seen in relation to other subgroups considered. The treatment parameters translated to a projected increase of 1.5 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per 1000 smokers in the short-term and 23.4 QALYS per 1000 smokers based on a lifetime horizon.

CONCLUSIONS

These figures throw light on service expenditure for each successful quit over the timeframe for which the service is offered in addition to highlighting variability in these costs across different subgroups of the user population.

Understanding perceived availability and importance of tobacco control interventions to inform European adoption of a UK economic model: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The evidence on the extent to which stakeholders in different European countries agree with availability and importance of tobacco-control interventions is limited. This study assessed and compared stakeholders' views from five European countries and compared the perceived ranking of interventions with evidence-based ranking using cost-effectiveness data.

METHODS

An interview survey (face-to-face, by phone or Skype) was conducted between April and July 2014 with five categories of stakeholders - decision makers, service purchasers, service providers, evidence generators and health promotion advocates - from Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. A list of potential stakeholders drawn from the research team's contacts and snowballing served as the sampling frame. An email invitation was sent to all stakeholders in this list and recruitment was based on positive replies. Respondents were asked to rate availability and importance of 30 tobacco control interventions. Kappa coefficients assessed agreement of stakeholders' views. A mean importance score for each intervention was used to rank the interventions. This ranking was compared with the ranking based on cost-effectiveness data from a published review.

RESULTS

Ninety-three stakeholders (55.7% response rate) completed the survey: 18.3% were from Germany, 17.2% from Hungary, 30.1% from the Netherlands, 19.4% from Spain, and 15.1% from the UK. Of those, 31.2% were decision makers, 26.9% evidence generators, 19.4% service providers, 15.1% health-promotion advocates, and 7.5% purchasers of services/pharmaceutical products. Smoking restrictions in public areas were rated as the most important intervention (mean score = 1.89). The agreement on availability of interventions between the stakeholders was very low (kappa = 0.098; 95% CI = [0.085, 0.111] but the agreement on the importance of the interventions was fair (kappa = 0.239; 95% CI = [0.208, 0.253]). A correlation was found between availability and importance rankings for stage-based interventions. The importance ranking was not statistically concordant with the ranking based on published cost-effectiveness data (Kendall rank correlation coefficient = 0.40; p-value = 0.11; 95% CI = [- 0.09, 0.89]).

CONCLUSIONS

The intrinsic differences in stakeholder views must be addressed while transferring economic evidence Europe-wide. Strong engagement with stakeholders, focussing on better communication, has a potential to mitigate this challenge.

Model-based economic evaluations in smoking cessation and their transferability to new contexts: a systematic review

AIMS

To identify different types of models used in economic evaluations of smoking cessation, analyse the quality of the included models examining their attributes and ascertain their transferability to a new context.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature on the economic evaluation of smoking cessation interventions published between 1996 and April 2015, identified via Medline, EMBASE, National Health Service (NHS) Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Health Technology Assessment (HTA). The checklist-based quality of the included studies and transferability scores was based on the European Network of Health Economic Evaluation Databases (EURONHEED) criteria. Studies that were not in smoking cessation, not original research, not a model-based economic evaluation, that did not consider adult population and not from a high-income country were excluded.

FINDINGS

Among the 64 economic evaluations included in the review, the state-transition Markov model was the most frequently used method (n = 30/64), with quality adjusted life years (QALY) being the most frequently used outcome measure in a life-time horizon. A small number of the included studies (13 of 64) were eligible for EURONHEED transferability checklist. The overall transferability scores ranged from 0.50 to 0.97, with an average score of 0.75. The average score per section was 0.69 (range = 0.35-0.92). The relative transferability of the studies could not be established due to a limitation present in the EURONHEED method.

CONCLUSION

All existing economic evaluations in smoking cessation lack in one or more key study attributes necessary to be fully transferable to a new context.

Parafricta Bootees and Undergarments to Reduce Skin Breakdown in People with or at Risk of Pressure Ulcers: A NICE Medical Technologies Guidance

As part of the development of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Medical Technologies Guidance on Parafricta Bootees and Undergarments to reduce skin breakdown in people with, or at risk of, pressure ulcers, the manufacturer (APA Parafricta Ltd) submitted clinical and economic evidence, which was critically appraised by an External Assessment Centre (EAC) and subsequently used by the Medical Technologies Advisory Committee (MTAC) to develop recommendations for further research. The University of Birmingham and Brunel University, acting as a consortium, were commissioned to act as the EAC, independently appraising the submission. This article is an overview of the original evidence submitted, the EAC's findings and the final NICE guidance. Very little comparative evidence was submitted to demonstrate the effectiveness of Parafricta Bootees or Undergarments. The sponsor submitted a simple cost analysis to estimate the costs of using Parafricta in addition to current practice-in comparison with current practice alone-in hospital and community settings separately. The analysis took a National Health Service (NHS) perspective. The basis of the analysis was a previously published comparative study, which showed no statistical difference in average lengths of stay between patients who wore Parafricta Undergarments and Bootees, and those who did not. The economic model incorporated the costs of Parafricta but assumed shorter lengths of stay with Parafricta. The sponsor concluded that Parafricta was cost saving relative to the comparators. The EAC made amendments to the sponsor's analysis to correct for errors and to reflect alternative assumptions. Parafricta remained cost saving in most analyses, and the savings per prevalent case ranged from £757 in the hospital model to £3455 in the community model. All analyses were severely limited by the available data on effectiveness-in particular, a lack of good-quality comparative studies.

Proceedings of Patient Reported Outcome Measure’s (PROMs) Conference Sheffield 2016: advances in patient reported outcomes research

S1 Using computerized adaptive testing

Tim Croudace

S2 Well-being: what is it, how does it compare to health and what are the implications of using it to inform health policy

John Brazier

O1 “Am I going to get better?”—Using PROMs to inform patients about the likely benefit of surgery

Nils Gutacker, Andrew Street

O2 Identifying Patient Reported Outcome Measures for an electronic Personal Health Record

Dan Robotham, Samantha Waterman, Diana Rose, Safarina Satkunanathan, Til Wykes

O3 Examining the change process over time qualitatively: transformative learning and response shift

Nasrin Nasr, Pamela Enderby

O4 Developing a PROM to evaluate self-management in diabetes (HASMID): giving patients a voice

Jill Carlton, Donna Rowen, Jackie Elliott, John Brazier, Katherine Stevens, Hasan Basarir, Alex Labeit

O5 Development of the Primary Care Outcomes Questionnaire (PCOQ)

Mairead Murphy, Sandra Hollinghurst, Chris Salisbury

O6 Developing the PKEX score- a multimodal assessment tool for patients with shoulder problems

Dominic Marley, James Wilson, Amy Barrat, Bibhas Roy

O7 Applying multiple imputation to multi-item patient reported outcome measures: advantages and disadvantages of imputing at the item, sub-scale or score level

Ines Rombach, Órlaith Burke, Crispin Jenkinson, Alastair Gray, Oliver Rivero-Arias

O8 Integrating Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) into routine primary care for patients with multimorbidity: a feasibility study

Ian Porter, Jaheeda Gangannagaripalli, Charlotte Bramwell, Jose M. Valderas

O9 eRAPID: electronic self-report and management of adverse-events for pelvic radiotherapy (RT) patients

Patricia Holch, Susan Davidson, Jacki Routledge, Ann Henry, Kevin Franks, Alex Gilbert, Kate Absolom & Galina Velikova

O10 Patient reported outcomes (PROMs) based recommendation in clinical guidance for the management of chronic conditions in the United Kingdom

Ian Porter, Jose M.Valderas

O11 Cross-sectional and longitudinal parameter shifts in epidemiological data: measurement invariance and response shifts in cohort and survey data describing the UK’s Quality of Life

Jan R. Boehnke

O12 Patient-reported outcomes within health technology decision making: current status and implications for future policy

Andrew Trigg, Ruth Howells

O13 Can social care needs and well-being be explained by the EQ-5D? Analysis of Health Survey for England dataset

Jeshika Singh, Subhash Pokhrel, Louise Longworth

O14 Where patients and policy meet: exploring individual-level use of the Long-Term Conditions Questionnaire (LTCQ)

Caroline Potter, Cheryl Hunter, Laura Kelly, Elizabeth Gibbons, Julian Forder, Angela Coulter, Ray Fitzpatrick, Michele Peters

Parametrization of nanoparticles: development of full-particle nanodescriptors

While metal oxide nanoparticles (NPs) are one of the most commonly used nanomaterials, the theoretical models used to analyze and predict their behavior have been mostly based on just the chemical composition or the extrapolation from small metal oxide clusters' calculations. In this study, a set of novel, theoretical full-particle descriptors for modeling, grouping or read-across of metal oxide NP properties and biological activity was developed based on the force-field calculation of the potential energies of whole NPs. The capability of these nanodescriptors to group the nanomaterials acoording to their biological activity was demonstrated by Principal Component Analysis (PCA). The grouping provided by the PCA approach was found to be in good accordance with the algal growth inhibition data of well characterized nanoparticles, synthesized and measured inside the consortia of the EU 7FP framework MODERN project.