Quality of life in cochlear implantees: Comparing utility values obtained through the Medical Outcome Study Short‐Form Survey‐6D and the Health Utility Index Mark 3. (11th August 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Arnoldner, Christoph; Lin, Vincent Y.; Bresler, Richard; Kaider, Alexandra; Kuthubutheen, Jafri; Shipp, David; Chen, Joseph M.
• Is Part Of: Laryngoscope. Volume 124:Number 11(2014:Nov.)
• Page Start: 2586
• Page End: 2590
• Publication Date: 2014-08-11
• Subjects: Otolaryngology -- Periodicals; 617.51005
• DOI: 10.1002/lary.24648
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0023-852X

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec id="lary24648-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Objectives/Hypothesis</title> <p>To evaluate the changes in health‐related quality of life in unilateral adult cochlear implant patients using the Medical Outcome Study Short‐Form Survey‐36 (SF‐36) and the Health Utility Index Mark 3 (HUI‐3). To do so, a health utility index was obtained by converting the SF‐36 to the Medical Outcome Study Short‐Form Survey‐6D (SF‐6D) to permit comparison with HUI<italic>‐</italic>3 scores in the context of health preference as measured by quality‐adjusted life years.</p> </sec> <sec id="lary24648-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Study Design</title> <p>Prospective cohort study.</p> </sec> <sec id="lary24648-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Methods</title> <p>Eighty‐one postlingually deaf adult patients undergoing cochlear implantation completed the SF‐36 and HUI‐3 preoperatively and at a median of 1.4 years (range, 11 months–5 years) after cochlear implantation.</p> </sec> <sec id="lary24648-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>The SF‐36 improvement was statistically significant in two domains. The SF‐36 data were converted to SF‐6D. Preoperatively, the mean SF‐6D utility score was 0.575 ± 0.056. One year postoperatively this score increased to 0.590 ± 0.064. The improvement of 0.015 ± 0.082 was not statistically significant (<italic>P</italic> = .1118). Of the HUI‐3 attributes, two showed improvement between preoperative and postoperative evaluations. The overall HUI‐3 score increased from 0.464 ± 0.207 preoperatively to 0.611 ± 0.190 postoperatively. The gain of 0.146 ± 0.19 was statistically significant (<italic>P</italic> < .0001). The intraclass correlation coefficient between the SF‐6D and HUI‐3 showed a very small correlation, both pre‐ and postoperatively.</p> </sec> <sec id="lary24648-sec-0005" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusions</title> <p>Against the backdrop of diminishing resources for healthcare, cost‐effective analysis is fast becoming an important tool. There remains a strong need for health‐related quality‐of‐life instruments that can truly reflect the benefit of cochlear implantation, in which utility estimates are fundamentally important. The SF‐36 scores, when converted to SF‐6D, do not correlate well with HUI‐3 scores in a cohort of adult cochlear implant recipients. The HUI‐3 remains the most appropriate tool for this patient group.</p> </sec> <sec id="lary24648-sec-0006" sec-type="section"> <title>Level of Evidence</title> <p>4 <italic>Laryngoscope</italic>, 124:2586–2590, 2014</p> </sec> </abstract>