A Systematic Review of Utility Measurements in the Surgical Literature

A Systematic Review of Health State Utility Values in the Plastic Surgery Literature

Cost-utility analyses assess health gains acquired by interventions by incorporating weighted health state utility values (HSUVs). HSUVs are important in plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) because they include qualitative metrics when comparing operative techniques or interventions. We systematically reviewed the literature to identify the extent and quality of existing original utilities research within PRS.

Methods

A systematic review of articles with original PRS utility data was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Subspecialty, survey sample size, and respondent characteristics were extracted. For each HSUV, the utility measure [direct (standard gamble, time trade off, visual analog scale) and/or indirect], mean utility score, and measure of variance were recorded. Similar HSUVs were pooled into weighted averages based on sample size if they were derived from the same utility measure.

Results

In total, 348 HSUVs for 194 disease states were derived from 56 studies within seven PRS subspecialties. Utility studies were most common in breast (n = 17, 30.4%) and hand/upper extremity (n = 15, 26.8%), and direct measurements were most frequent [visual analog scale (55.4%), standard gamble (46.4%), time trade off (57.1%)]. Studies surveying the general public had more respondents (n = 165, IQR 103-299) than those that surveyed patients (n = 61, IQR 48-79) or healthcare professionals (n = 42, IQR 10-109). HSUVs for 18 health states were aggregated.

Conclusions

The HSUV literature within PRS is scant and heterogeneous. Researchers should become familiar with these outcomes, as integrating utility and cost data will help illustrate that the impact of certain interventions are cost-effective when we consider patient quality of life.

Population-Based Health Utility Assessment of Migraine Headache Symptoms before and after Surgical Intervention

BACKGROUND

Approximately 30 million Americans suffer from migraine headaches. The primary goals of this study are to (1) use Migraine-Specific Symptoms and Disability criteria and Migraine Headache Index to describe the symptomatic improvement following decompressive surgery for refractory migraines, and (2) use the average Migraine Headache Index preoperatively and postoperatively for health utility assessment from a healthy patient's perspective.

METHODS

The Migraine-Specific Symptoms and Disability criteria and the Migraine Headache Index were used to characterize migraine symptoms in the authors' patient population before and after decompressive surgery. Healthy individuals were randomized to a scenario in which they assumed either the preoperative or postoperative average patient symptom profile described by the authors' migraine patients. Health utility assessments were used to quantify the evaluation of health states the authors' patients experienced before and after surgical migraine therapy.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients underwent surgery for migraine headaches. The Migraine-Specific Symptoms and Disability questionnaire showed a significant decrease in both frequency of headaches per month (p < 0.0001) and overall pain score (p = 0.007). The Migraine Headache Index demonstrated a statistically significant improvement (p = 0.03). Healthy individuals in the preoperative group had significantly lower utility scores compared with the postoperative group in all of the health utility assessments completed for migraine symptoms.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to use health utility assessments to attest the efficacy of decompressive therapy by demonstrating the population perspective, which perceived a significant improvement in quality of life following the surgical treatment of migraines in the authors' patients.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Evaluation of Societal Health Utility of Facial Palsy and Facial Reanimation

Importance

The severity of a health state may be quantified using health utility measures. The utility of flaccid unilateral facial paralysis and unilateral moderate to severe postparalytic facial nerve syndrome with synkinesis may be challenging to discern from photographs alone.

Objective

To determine the societal health utility of flaccid unilateral facial paralysis, unilateral moderate to severe postparalytic facial nerve syndrome, and post-facial reanimation using standard video.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This survey study was conducted at the Massachusetts Eye and Ear and the Harvard Decision Science Laboratory from June 14, 2017, to August 3, 2017. Healthy adult naïve observers were recruited through advertising in the Cambridge, Massachusetts, area. Participants (n = 298) completed the web-based, interactive survey in person. The survey comprised clinical vignettes consisting of symptom summaries, videos, and pictures depicting 5 health states.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Adult naïve observers ranked the utility of 5 randomized health states (flaccid unilateral facial paralysis, unilateral moderate to severe postparalytic facial nerve syndrome, post-facial reanimation, monocular blindness, and binocular blindness) according to the visual analog scale (VAS), standard gamble (SG), and time trade-off (TTO) measures. Standard videos of patients' facial function were used.

Results

In total, 377 naïve observers were recruited and completed the survey in its entirety. Of the 377 participants, 298 (79.0%) were included for analysis. Among the 298 participants, 151 (50.7%) were female, 146 (49.0%) were male, with a mean (SD) age of 33.0 (15.1) years. No differences in health utility scores (SD) were observed between flaccid unilateral facial paralysis and unilateral moderate to severe postparalytic facial nerve syndrome (VAS: 0.598 [0.213] vs 0.629 [0.207]; SG: 0.714 [0.245] vs 0.748 [0.237]; TTO: 0.716 [0.248] vs 0.741 [0.247]). Both health states rated substantially worse than monocular blindness (VAS: 0.691 [0.212]; SG: 0.817 [0.204]; TTO: 0.826 [0.196]) and post-facial reanimation (VAS: 0.742 [0.189]; SG: 0.833 [0.206]; TTO: 0.838 [0.19]).

Conclusions and Relevance

Health utility scores for flaccid unilateral facial paralysis and unilateral moderate to severe postparalytic facial nerve syndrome appeared to be equivalent and worse than that for monocular blindness, whereas scores for post-facial reanimation were substantially higher than the scores for the 2 facial movement disorders. These findings may provide insights into the societal advantages of facial reanimation surgery.

Level of Evidence

NA.

Proximal Row Carpectomy versus Four-Corner Arthrodesis for the Treatment of Scapholunate Advanced Collapse/Scaphoid Nonunion Advanced Collapse Wrist: A Cost-Utility Analysis

BACKGROUND

Two mainstay surgical options for salvage in scapholunate advanced collapse and scaphoid nonunion advanced collapse are proximal row carpectomy and four-corner arthrodesis. This study evaluates the cost-utility of proximal row carpectomy versus three methods of four-corner arthrodesis for the treatment of scapholunate advanced collapse/scaphoid nonunion advanced collapse wrist.

METHODS

A cost-utility analysis was performed in accordance with the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. A comprehensive literature review was performed to obtain the probability of potential complications. Costs were derived using both societal and health care sector perspectives. A visual analogue scale survey of expert hand surgeons estimated utilities. Overall cost, probabilities, and quality-adjusted life-years were used to complete a decision tree analysis. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Forty studies yielding 1730 scapholunate advanced collapse/scaphoid nonunion advanced collapse wrists were identified. Decision tree analysis determined that both four-corner arthrodesis with screw fixation and proximal row carpectomy were cost-effective options, but four-corner arthrodesis with screw was the optimal treatment strategy. Four-corner arthrodesis with Kirschner-wire fixation and four-corner arthrodesis with plate fixation were dominated (inferior) strategies and therefore not cost-effective. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that when the quality-adjusted life-years for a successful four-corner arthrodesis with screw fixation are lower than 26.36, proximal row carpectomy becomes the optimal strategy. However, multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the results of our model.

CONCLUSIONS

Four-corner arthrodesis with screw fixation and proximal row carpectomy are both cost-effective treatment options for scapholunate advanced collapse/scaphoid nonunion advanced collapse wrist because of their lower complication profile and high efficacy, with four-corner arthrodesis with screw as the most cost-effective treatment. Four-corner arthrodesis with plate and Kirschner-wire fixation should be avoided from a cost-effectiveness standpoint.

A systematic review of utilities in hand surgery literature

PURPOSE

To systematically review the literature to determine if utilities (a quantitative way to express patient preferences for health outcomes) have been measured in hand surgery studies.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using Cochrane, EMBASE, HealthSTAR, MEDLINE, and CINAHL electronic databases (1966-2013). This search was supplemented by cited and manual reference searches and expert consultation to retrieve all relevant studies. Studies were selected by 2 independent reviewers if they pertained to hand or wrist surgery, were published in English, and measured utilities as an outcome. Descriptive data were extracted, including the hand surgery procedure investigated, study design, value of utilities, and methodology of utilities measurement.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included after reviewing 989 studies. Most hand conditions were associated with utilities less than 0.8. Utilities in the reviewed studies were measured using different methods and from different subjects. Three studies paradoxically mapped greater utilities for poorer heath states.

CONCLUSIONS

Hand conditions cause impairment, as evidenced by their utilities. Measurement of utilities remains uncommon in hand surgery literature. Future studies should not only measure utilities but also do so with consistent and appropriate methodology to ensure that mapped values are valid and comparable.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic/decision analysis III.

Cost-utility of reduction mammaplasty assessed for the Brazilian public health system

BACKGROUND

Economic evaluation is important for making decisions about resource allocation. Few cost-utility or cost-effectiveness studies on breast hypertrophy have been reported in the medical literature.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to determine the cost-utility of reduction mammaplasty in the Brazilian national health care system.

METHODS

This randomized controlled study was conducted in a university-affiliated hospital. Sixty patients with breast hypertrophy were enrolled prospectively and were assigned randomly to either the control group (n = 30 patients who received follow-up for 6 months) or the treatment group (n = 30 patients who underwent reduction mammaplasty). Direct costs were recorded, and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) was administered to both groups at the beginning of the study (preoperatively for the treatment group) and 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Utility was determined with Instrument 6D of the Brazilian version of the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-6D), from the SF-36 data.

RESULTS

At the 6-month follow-up, the treatment group showed an improvement in utility, with an average direct cost of approximately £104.

CONCLUSIONS

Reduction mammaplasty performed in the Brazilian national health care system provides a cost-utility ratio equivalent to approximately £142 per 1 quality-adjusted life year.

Fundamental principles of conducting a surgery economic analysis study

SUMMARY

The use of economic evaluation in surgery is scarce. Economic evaluation is used even less so in plastic surgery, in which health-related quality of life is of particular importance. This article, part of a tutorial series on evidence-based medicine, focuses on the fundamental principles of conducting a surgery economic analysis. The authors include the essential aspects of conducting a surgical cost-utility analysis by considering perspectives, costs, outcomes, and utilities. The authors also describe and give examples of how to conduct the analyses (including calculating quality-adjusted life-years and discounting), how to interpret the results, and how to report the results. Although economic analyses are not simple to conduct, a well-conducted one provides many rewards, such as recommending the adoption of a more effective treatment. For comparing and interpreting economic analysis publications, it is important that all studies use consistent methodology and report the results in a similar manner.

How should quality-of-life data be incorporated into a cost analysis of breast reconstruction? A consideration of implant versus free TRAM flap procedures

BACKGROUND

Although studies have compared the costs of implant and transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap reconstruction, none has considered how quality-of-life data would affect such an analysis.

METHODS

A Markov decision analytic model was used. Medical costs associated with the two procedures were obtained from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes. The diagnosis-related group code associated with each ICD-9 code was referenced in Medicare's MedPAR database. A cost-to-charge ratio was calculated using hospital charges covered by Medicare and Medicare reimbursements for each diagnosis-related group code. This ratio was multiplied by the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project database mean charge. Hypothetical utilities were used to perform a sensitivity analysis and determine the effects of quality-of-life data on costs.

RESULTS

The mean lifetime cost was $14,080 for a free TRAM flap and $16,940 for an implant, a $2860 difference. Based on a sensitivity analysis, however, this cost difference decreased as age at initial procedure increased. Furthermore, a consideration of patient utility that increased the health-related quality-of-life score (based on a scale of 0 to 1) for implants even slightly relative to free TRAM flaps made the implants cost effective. The health-related quality-of-life difference needed to generate a cost per quality-adjusted life-year for breast implants below an acceptable threshold was extremely small (0.64 percent).

CONCLUSIONS

To fully evaluate the cost difference between these procedures, a cost-effectiveness analysis must be performed that incorporates quality-of-life data. Such data would significantly affect assessments of the cost difference between implant and autogenous tissue reconstruction.

Correlation of Patient-Derived Utility Values and Quality of Life after Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Utility value (UV) represents the "value" that a patient places on a given health state and can be closely associated with quality of life. The purpose of this study was to determine if UV and quality of life are correlated after pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma and to assess quality of life after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer were interviewed using the 36-item Short Form Health Survey, which measures 8 domains of quality of life. Patients assessed their current health state by rating their present health from 0 (which was equivalent to death) to 100 (which was equivalent to prefect health), and by a time-exchange (TE) method that asked how many years of their present life they would be willing to exchange for perfect health. Statistical analysis consisted of linear regression analysis and Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were interviewed. The UVs correlated with the TE (p = 0.003, r = -0.63), and 6 of 8 36-item Short Form Health Survey domains: physical functioning (p < 0.00001, r = 0.82), role-physical (p = 0.005, r = 0.61), bodily pain (p = 0.003, r = 0.63), general health (p = 0.00001, r = 0.81), vitality (p = 0.01, r = 0.54), and mental health (p = 0.03, r = 0.5). The TE score correlated with the physical functioning (p = 0.06, r = -0.59) and bodily pain (p = 0.05, r = -0.44) domains. There were significant differences in the UV, TE, physical functioning, role-physical, and role-emotional between patients less than 1 year and more than 1 year postoperative.

CONCLUSIONS

These data imply that patient-perceived health status and quality of life are linked and that quality-of-life scores after pancreaticoduodenectomy are better in patients more than 1 year postoperative.