PharmacoEconomics

, Volume 30, Issue 8, pp 661–679 | Cite as

Preference-Based Health-Related Quality-of-Life Outcomes in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders

A Comparison of Generic Instruments
  • J. Mick Tilford
  • Nalin Payakachat
  • Erica Kovacs
  • Jeffrey M. Pyne
  • Werner Brouwer
  • Todd G. Nick
  • Jayne Bellando
  • Karen A. Kuhlthau
Original Research Article

Abstract

Background

Cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmaceutical and other treatments for children with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) has the potential to improve access to services by demonstrating the value of treatment to public and private payers, but methods for measuring QALYs in children are under-studied. No cost-effectiveness analyses have been undertaken in this population using the cost-per-QALY metric.

Objective

This study describes health-related quality-of-life (HR-QOL) outcomes in children with ASDs and compares the sensitivity of two generic preference-based instruments relative to ASD-related conditions and symptoms.

Methods

The study design was cross-sectional with prospectively collected outcome data that were correlated with retrospectively assessed clinical information. Subjects were recruited from two sites of the Autism Treatment Network (ATN) in the US: a developmental centre in Little Rock, Arkansas, and an outpatient psychiatric clinic at Columbia University Medical Center in New York. Children that met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria for an ASD by a multidisciplinary team evaluation were asked to participate in a clinical registry. Families of children with an ASD that agreed to be contacted about participation in future research studies as part of the ATN formed the sampling frame for the study. Families were included if the child with the ASD was between 4 and 17 years of age and the family caregiver spoke English. Eligible families were contacted by mail to see if they would be interested in participating in the study with 150 completing surveys. HR-QOL outcomes were described using the Health Utilities Index (HUI) 3 and the Quality of Well-Being Self-Administered (QWB-SA) scale obtained by proxy via the family caregiver.

Results

Children were diagnosed as having autistic disorder (76%), pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified [PDD-NOS] (15%), and Asperger’s disorder (9%). Average HUI3 and QWB-SA scores were 0.68 (SD 0.21, range 0.07–1) and 0.59 (SD 0.16, range 0.18–1), respectively. The HUI3 score was significantly correlated with clinical variables including adaptive behaviour (ρ=0.52;p<0.001) and cognitive functioning (ρ=0.36;p<0.001). The QWB-SA score had weak correlation with adaptive behaviour (ρ=0.25;p<0.001) and cognitive functioning (ρ=0.17;p<0.005). Change scores for the HUI3 were larger than the QWB-SA for all clinical measures. Scores for the HUI3 increased 0.21 points (95% CI 0.14, 0.29) across the first to the third quartile of the cognitive functioning measure compared with 0.05 (95% CI −0.01, 0.11) for the QWB-SA. Adjusted R2 values also were higher for the HUI3 compared with the QWB-SA across all clinical measures.

Conclusions

The HUI3 was more sensitive to clinical measures used to characterize children with autism compared with the QWB-SA score. The findings provide a benchmark to compare scores obtained by alternative methods and instruments. Researchers should consider incorporating the HUI3 in clinical trials and other longitudinal research studies to build the evidence base for describing the cost effectiveness of services provided to this important population.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The project was supported by a grant (no. R01MH089466) from the National Institute of Mental Health with JMT and KAK serving as principal investigators. The content of this article is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute of Mental Health or the National Institutes of Health. The authors acknowledge the members of the ATN for use of the data. The data for the study were collected as part of the ATN, a programme of Autism Speaks. Further support came from a cooperative agreement (UA3 MC 11054) from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Maternal and Child Health Research Program, to the Massachusetts General Hospital. The work described in this article represents the independent efforts of the authors with no restrictions from the funding source or the ATN. None of the authors of this study reported a conflict of interest associated with the preparation of the manuscript. Maria Melguizo, Nupur Chowdhury, Rebecca Rieger and Latunja Sockwell provided excellent research assistance.

JMT, NP, JMP, and KAK conceptualized the original study with input from WB, TGN, JB and EK. JMT was the principal author of the manuscript with input from WB, NP, TGN, JMP and the co-authors. Data collection was the work of JMT, NP, JB and EK. TGN, JMT and NP led the data analysis. JMT serves as the guarantor for the overall content of the paper.

This paper is part of a theme issue co-edited by Lisa Prosser, University of Michigan, USA, and no external funding was used to support the publication of this theme issue.

References

  1. 1.
    Strock M. Autism spectrum disorders (pervasive developmental disorders) [NIH publication no. NIH-04–5511]. Bethesda (MD): National Institutes of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2004Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nordin V, Gillberg C. Autism spectrum disorders in children with physical or mental disability or both. I: clinical and epidemiological aspects. Dev Med Child Neurol 1996; 38(4): 297–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rapin I. Autistic children: diagnosis and clinical features. Pediatrics 1991; 87(5 Pt 2): 751–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rapin I. The autistic-spectrum disorders. N Engl J Med 2002; 347(5): 302–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aman MG. Management of hyperactivity and other acting-out problems in patients with autism spectrum disorder. Semin Pediatr Neurol 2004; 11(3): 225–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Arnold LE, Vitiello B, McDougle C, et al. Parent-defined target symptoms respond to risperidone in RUPP autism study: customer approach to clinical trials. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2003; 42(12): 1443–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Militerni R, Bravaccio C, Falco C, et al. Repetitive behaviors in autistic disorder. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2002; 11(5): 210–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Couturier JL, Speechley KN, Steele M, et al. Parental perception of sleep problems in children of normal intelligence with pervasive developmental disorders: prevalence, severity, and pattern. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2005; 44(8): 815–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Polimeni MA, Richdale AL, Francis AJ. A survey of sleep problems in autism, Asperger’s disorder and typically developing children. J Intellect Disabil Res 2005; 49(Pt 4): 260–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Limoges E, Mottron L, Bolduc C, et al. Atypical sleep architecture and the autism phenotype. Brain 2005; 128(Pt 5): 1049–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oyane NM, Bjorvatn B. Sleep disturbances in adolescents and young adults with autism and Asperger syndrome. Autism 2005; 9(1): 83–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kuhlthau K, Orlich F, Hall TA, et al. Health-related quality of life in children with autism spectrum disorders: results from the autism treatment network. J Autism Dev Disord 2010; 40(6): 721–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, et al. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Neumann PJ, Goldie SJ, Weinstein MC. Preference-based measures in economic evaluation in health care. Annu Rev Public Health 2000; 21: 587–611PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Neumann PJ, Greenberg D. Is the United States ready for QALYs? Health Aff (Millwood) 2009; 28(5): 1366–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tilford JM. Cost-effectiveness analysis and emergency medical services for children: issues and applications. Ambul Pediatr 2002; 2(4 Suppl.): 330–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Griebsch I, Coast J, Brown J. Quality-adjusted life-years lack quality in pediatric care: a critical review of published cost-utility studies in child health. Pediatrics 2005; 115(5): e600–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Grosse SD, Prosser LA, Asakawa K, et al. QALY weights for neurosensory impairments in pediatric economic evaluations: case studies and a critique. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2010; 10(3): 293–308PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Prosser LA, Hammitt JK, Keren R. Measuring health preferences for use in cost-utility and cost-benefit analyses of interventions in children: theoretical and methodological considerations. Pharmacoeconomics 2007; 25(9): 713–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Prosser LA. Current challenges and future research in measuring preferences for pediatric health outcomes. J Pediatr 2009; 155(1): 7–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Petrou S, Kupek E. Estimating preference-based Health Utilities Index mark 3 utility scores for childhood conditions in England and Scotland. Med Decis Making 2009; 29(3): 291–303PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Petrou S, Johnson S, Wolke D, et al. Economic costs and preference-based health-related quality of life outcomes associated with childhood psychiatric disorders. Brit J Psychiat 2010; 197: 395–404PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pyne JM, Sullivan G, Kaplan R, et al. Comparing the sensitivity of generic effectiveness measures with symptom improvement in persons with schizophrenia. Med Care 2003; 41(2): 208–17PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    McCrone P, Patel A, Knapp M, et al. A comparison of SF-6D and EQ-5D utility scores in a study of patients with schizophrenia. J Ment Health Policy Econ 2009; 12(1): 27–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pyne JM, French M, McCollister K, et al. Preference-weighted health-related quality of life measures and substance use disorder severity. Addiction 2008; 103(8): 1320–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Brazier J, Roberts J, Tsuchiya A, et al. A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Econ 2004; 13(9): 873–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Marra CA, Woolcott JC, Kopec JA, et al. A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RA-QoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis. Soc Sci Med 2005; 60(7): 1571–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lamers LM, Bouwmans CA, van Sa, et al. Comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities in mental health patients. Health Econ 2006; 15(11): 1229–36PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    McDonough CM, Tosteson AN. Measuring preferences for cost-utility analysis: how choice of method may influence decision-making. Pharmacoeconomics 2007; 25(2): 93–106PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lipscomb J, Drummond M, Fryback D, et al. Retaining, and enhancing, the QALY. Value Health 2009; 12 Suppl. 1: S18–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Feeny D, Furlong W, Saigal S, et al. Comparing directly measured standard gamble scores to HUI2 and HUI3 utility scores: group- and individual-level comparisons. Soc Sci Med 2004; 58(4): 799–809PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Smith-Olinde L, Grosse SD, Olinde F, et al. Health state preference scores for children with permanent childhood hearing loss: a comparative analysis of the QWB and HUI3. Qual Life Res 2008; 17(6): 943–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Buysse CM, Raat H, Hazelzet JA, et al. Long-term health status in childhood survivors of meningococcal septic shock. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2008; 162(11): 1036–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Prince FH, Geerdink LM, Borsboom GJ, et al. Major improvements in health-related quality of life during the use of etanercept in patients with previously refractoryjuvenile idiopathic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2010; 69(1): 138–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pyne JM, Sieber WJ, David K, et al. Use of the Quality of Well-Being Self-Administered version (QWB-SA) in assessing health-related quality of life in depressed patients. J Affect Disord 2003; 76(1–3): 237–47PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW, et al. Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the Health Utilities Index mark 3 system. Med Care 2002; 40(2): 113–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kaplan RM, Anderson JP, Wu AW, et al. The Quality of Well-Being Scale: applications in AIDS, cystic fibrosis, and arthritis. Med Care 1989; 27(3 Suppl.): S27–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kaplan RM, Anderson JP. A general health policy model: update and applications. Health Serv Res 1988; 23(2): 203–35PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gold MR, Patrick DL, Hadorn DC, et al. Identifying and valuing outcomes. In: Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC, editors. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996: 82–134Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Czyzewski DI, Mariotto MJ, Bartholomew KL, et al. Measurement of quality of well being in a child and adolescent cystic fibrosis population. Med Care 1994; 32(9): 965–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bradlyn AS, Harris CV, Warner JE, et al. An investigation of the validity of the Quality of Well-Being Scale with pediatric oncology patients. Health Psychol 1993; 12(3): 246–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Tilford JM, Aitken ME, Goodman AC, et al. Child health-related quality of life following neurocritical care for traumatic brain injury: an analysis of preference-weighted outcomes. Neurocrit Care 2007; 7(1): 64–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ruchlin HS, Insinga RP. A review of health-utility data for osteoarthritis: implications for clinical trial-based evaluation. Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26(11): 925–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Donald SC, Unutzer J, Schoenbaum M, et al. Can utility-weighted health-related quality-of-life estimates capture health effects of quality improvement for depression? Med Care 2001; 39(11): 1246–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gotham K, Pickles A, Lord C. Standardizing ADOS scores for a measure of severity in autism spectrum disorders. J Autism Dev Disord 2009; 39(5): 693–705PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Paul R, Miles S, Cicchetti D, et al. Adaptive behavior in autism and pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified: microanalysis of scores on the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales. J Autism Dev Disord 2004; 34(2): 223–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sparrow SS, Cicchetti DV, Balla DA. Vineland-II Adaptive Behavior Scales. Circle Pines (MN): AGS Publishing, 2005Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Coplan J. Atypicality, intelligence, and age: a conceptual model of autistic spectrum disorder. Dev Med Child Neurol 2003; 45(10): 712–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Coplan J, Jawad AF. Modeling clinical outcome of children with autistic spectrum disorders. Pediatrics 2005; 116(1): 117–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Harrell Jr FE. Regression modeling strategies with applications to linear models, survival analysis, and logistic regression. New York: Springer, 2001Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Nicholas JS, Charles JM, Carpenter LA, et al. Prevalence and characteristics of children with autism-spectrum disorders. Ann Epidemiol 2008; 18(2): 130–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Eiser C, Morse R. Can parents rate their child’s health-related quality of life? Results of a systematic review. Qual Life Res 2001; 10(4): 347–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Upton P, Lawford J, Eiser C. Parent-child agreement across child health-related quality of life instruments: a review of the literature. Qual Life Res 2008 Aug; 17(6): 895–913PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Russell LB. Comment on Petrou and Kupek: use unadjusted HUI3 scores, not adjusted disutilities. Med Decis Making 2010; 30(1): 143PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Zhang J, Quan H, Ng J, et al. Some statistical methods for multiple endpoints in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1997; 18(3): 204–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Rothenberg B, Samson D. Special report: early intensive behavioral intervention based on applied behavior analysis among children with autism spectrum disorders. Technology Evaluation Center Assessment Program 2009; 23(9): 1–61 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.bcbs.com/blueresources/tec/vols/23/23_09.pdf [Accessed 2012 Jun 1]Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Basu A, Meltzer D. Implications of spillover effects within the family for medical cost-effectiveness analysis. J Health Econ 2005; 24(4): 751–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Brouwer WBF, Van Exel NJA, Tilford JM. Incorporating caregiver and family effects in economic evaluations of child health. In: Ungar WJ, editor. Economic evaluation in child health. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009: 55–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Bobinac A, van Exel JA, Rutten FF, et al. Health effects in significant others: separating family and care-giving effects. Med Decis Making 2011; 31(2): 292–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Bobinac A, van Exel NJ, Rutten FF, et al. Caring for and caring about: disentangling the caregiver effect and the family effect. J Health Econ 2010; 29(4): 549–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Torrance GW, Feeny DH, Furlong WJ, et al. Multiattribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system: Health Utilities Index mark 2. Med Care 1996; 34(7): 702–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Richardson J, Sinha K, Iezzi A, et al. Modelling the utility of health states with the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) 8D instrument: overview and utility scoring algorithm [research paper no. 63]. Melbourne (VIC): Centre for Health Economics, Monash University, 2011Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Mick Tilford
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Nalin Payakachat
    • 2
  • Erica Kovacs
    • 4
  • Jeffrey M. Pyne
    • 5
    • 6
  • Werner Brouwer
    • 7
  • Todd G. Nick
    • 3
  • Jayne Bellando
    • 3
  • Karen A. Kuhlthau
    • 8
    • 9
  1. 1.Department of Health Policy and ManagementUniversity of Arkansas for Medical SciencesLittle RockUSA
  2. 2.Department of Pharmacy PracticeUniversity of Arkansas for Medical SciencesLittle RockUSA
  3. 3.Department of PediatricsUniversity of Arkansas for Medical SciencesLittle RockUSA
  4. 4.Department of PsychiatryColumbia University Medical CenterNew YorkUSA
  5. 5.Center for Mental Healthcare and Outcomes ResearchCentral Arkansas Veterans Healthcare SystemLittle RockUSA
  6. 6.Psychiatric Research InstituteUniversity of Arkansas for Medical SciencesLittle RockUSA
  7. 7.Department of Health Policy and ManagementErasmus UniversityRotterdamThe Netherlands
  8. 8.Department of PediatricsHarvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA
  9. 9.Center for Adolescent Health PolicyMassachusetts General HospitalBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations