IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v39y2021i2d10.1007_s40273-020-00984-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Health State Utilities of Patients with Heart Failure: A Systematic Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • Gian Luca Di Tanna

    (University of New South Wales
    The George Institute for Global Health)

  • Michael Urbich

    (Amgen (Europe) GmbH, Global Value & Access, Modeling Center of Excellence)

  • Heidi S. Wirtz

    (Amgen Inc, Global Health Economics)

  • Barbara Potrata

    (Pharmerit - an OPEN Health company)

  • Marieke Heisen

    (Pharmerit - an OPEN Health company)

  • Craig Bennison

    (Pharmerit - an OPEN Health company)

  • John Brazier

    (Health Economics and Decision Science, University of Sheffield)

  • Gary Globe

    (Amgen Inc, Global Health Economics)

Abstract

Background and Objectives New treatments and interventions are in development to address clinical needs in heart failure. To support decision making on reimbursement, cost-effectiveness analyses are frequently required. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify and summarize heart failure utility values for use in economic evaluations. Methods Databases were searched for articles published until June 2019 that reported health utility values for patients with heart failure. Publications were reviewed with specific attention to study design; reported values were categorized according to the health states, ‘chronic heart failure’, ‘hospitalized’, and ‘other acute heart failure’. Interquartile limits (25th percentile ‘Q1’, 75th percentile ‘Q3’) were calculated for health states and heart failure subgroups where there were sufficient data. Results The systematic literature review identified 161 publications based on data from 142 studies. Utility values for chronic heart failure were reported by 128 publications; 39 publications published values for hospitalized and three for other acute heart failure. There was substantial heterogeneity in the specifics of the study populations, methods of elicitation, and summary statistics, which is reflected in the wide range of utility values reported. EQ-5D was the most used instrument; the interquartile limit for mean EQ-5D values for chronic heart failure was 0.64–0.72. Conclusions There is a wealth of published utility values for heart failure to support economic evaluations. Data are heterogenous owing to specificities of the study population and methodology of utility value elicitation and analysis. Choice of value(s) to support economic models must be carefully justified to ensure a robust economic analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Gian Luca Di Tanna & Michael Urbich & Heidi S. Wirtz & Barbara Potrata & Marieke Heisen & Craig Bennison & John Brazier & Gary Globe, 2021. "Health State Utilities of Patients with Heart Failure: A Systematic Literature Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 211-229, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:39:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00984-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-020-00984-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-020-00984-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-020-00984-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Chris Sampson’s journal round-up for 15th March 2021
      by Chris Sampson in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2021-03-15 12:00:14

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:39:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00984-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.