The Library

Health-state utilities in a prisoner population : a cross-sectional survey

Tools

Chong, Christopher A. K. Y., Li, Sicong, Nguyen, Geoffrey C., Sutton, A. J., Levy, M. H. (Michael H.), Butler, Tony, Krahn, Murray and Thein, Hla-Hla. (2009) Health-state utilities in a prisoner population : a cross-sectional survey. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, Vol.7 (No.78). ISSN 1477-7525

Preview

PDF
WRAP_Sutton_prison_population.pdf - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (227Kb)

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-7-78.

Abstract

Background: Health-state utilities for prisoners have not been described. Methods: We used data from a 1996 cross-sectional survey of Australian prisoners (n = 734). Respondent-level SF-36 data was transformed into utility scores by both the SF-6D and Nichol's method. Socio-demographic and clinical predictors of SF-6D utility were assessed in univariate analyses and a multivariate general linear model. Results: The overall mean SF-6D utility was 0.725 (SD 0.119). When subdivided by various medical conditions, prisoner SF-6D utilities ranged from 0.620 for angina to 0.764 for those with none/mild depressive symptoms. Utilities derived by the Nichol's method were higher than SF-6D scores, often by more than 0.1. In multivariate analysis, significant independent predictors of worse utility included female gender, increasing age, increasing number of comorbidities and more severe depressive symptoms. Conclusion: The utilities presented may prove useful for future economic and decision models evaluating prison-based health programs.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	H Social Sciences > HV Social pathology. Social and public welfare R Medicine > RA Public aspects of medicine
Divisions:	Faculty of Science > Life Sciences (2010- ) > Biological Sciences ( -2010)
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):	Prisoners -- Health and hygiene -- Australia, Medical care -- Research -- Australia
Journal or Publication Title:	Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Publisher:	BioMed Central Ltd.
ISSN:	1477-7525
Date:	28 August 2009
Volume:	Vol.7
Number:	No.78
Identification Number:	10.1186/1477-7525-7-78.
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Access rights to Published version:	Open Access
Funder:	Corrections Health Service (N.S.W.) (CHS), New South Wales. Dept. of Health (DoH), Lakeridge Health Oshawa (LHO)
References:	1. White P, Whiteford H: Prisons: mental health institutions of the 21st century? MJA 2006, 185:302-303. 2. Sterling RK, Brown RS Jr, Hofmann CM, Luketic VA, Stravitz RT, Sanyal AG, Contos MJ, Mills AS, Smith V, Shiffman ML: The spectrum of chronic hepatitis C virus infection in the Virginia correctional system: development of a strategy for the evaluation and treatment of inmates with HCV. Am J Gastroenterol 2005, 100:313-321. 3. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC: Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine New York: Oxford University Press; 1996. 4. Aoki N, Dunn K, Fukui T, Beck JR, Schull WJ, Li HK: Cost-effectiveness analysis of telemedicine to evaluate diabetic retinopathy in a prisoner population. Diab Care 2004, 27:1095-1101. 5. Sutton AJ, Edmunds WJ, Sweeting MJ, Gill ON: The cost-effectiveness of screening and treatment for hepatitis C in prisons in England and Wales: a cost-utility analysis. J Viral Hepat 2008, 15:797-808. 6. Butler T: Preliminary findings of the NSW Inmate Health Survey NSW: NSW Corrections Health Service; 1997. 7. Beck AT, Rush AJ, Shaw BF, Emery G: Cognitive Therapy of Depression NewYork: Guildford; 1979. 8. Babor TF, Higgins-Biddle JC, Saunders JB, Monteiro MG: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Guidelines for Use in Primary Care 2nd edition. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001. 9. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD: The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992, 30:473-483. 10. Petrou S, Hockley C: An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population. Health Econ 2005, 14:1169-1189. 11. Zar JH: Biostatistical Analysis Upper Saddle River: Simon & Schuster; 1996. 12. Maetzel A, Krahn M, Naglie G: The cost-effectiveness of celecoxib and rofecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis. Ottawa: Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment; 2001. Technology report no 23 13. Nichol MD, Sengupta N, Globe DR: Evaluating quality-adjusted life years: Estimation of the health utility index (HUI2) from the SF-36. Med Decis Making 2001, 21:105-112. 14. Brazier JE, Roberts JR, Deverill M: The estimation of a preference- based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002, 21:271-292. 15. Torrance GW, Feeny DH, Furlong WJ, Barr RD, Zhang Y, Wang Q: Multi-Attribute Preference Functions for A Comprehensive Health Status Classification System: Health Utilities Index Mark 2. Med Care 1996, 34:702-722. 16. Lee BB, King MT, Simpson JM, Haran MJ, Stockler MR, Marial O, Salkeld G: Validity, responsiveness, and minimal important difference for the SF-6D health utility scale in a spinal cord injured population. Value Health 2008, 11:680-688. 17. Fryback DG, Dunham NC, Palta M, Hammer J, Buechner J, Cherepanov D, Herrington SA, Hays RD, Kaplan RM, Ganiats TG, Feeny D, Kind P: US Norms for six generic health-related quality- of-life indexes from the National Health Measurement Study. Med Care 2007, 45:1162-1170. 18. Plugge E, Fitzpatrick R: Assessing the health of women in prison: A study from the United Kingdom. Health Care Women Int 2005, 26:62-68. 19. Mooney M, Hannon F, Barry M, Friel S, Kelleher C: Perceived quality of life and mental health status of Irish female prisoners. Ir Med J 2002, 95:241-243. 20. Thein HH, Butler T, Krahn M, Rawlinson W, Levy MH, Kaldor JM, Dore GJ: The effect of hepatitis C virus infection on healthrelated quality of life in prisoners. J Urban Health 2006, 83:275-288. 21. Rodger AJ, Jolley D, Thompson SC, Lanigan A, Crofts N: The impact of diagnosis of hepatitis C virus on quality of life. Hepatology 1999, 30:1299-1301. 22. Feeny D, Eng K: Comparing utility scores derived from the Short-Form 36, standard gamble and Health Utilities Index. Institute of Health Economics Working Paper 04-05; 2004. 23. Lobo FS, Gross CR, Matthees BJ: Estimation and comparison of derived preference scores from the SF-36 in lung transplant patients. Quality of Life Research 2004, 13:377-388. 24. Sakthong P, Charoenvisuthiwongs R, Shabunthom R: A comparison of EQ-5D index scores using the UK, US and Japan preference weights in a Thai sample with type 2 diabetes. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2008, 6:71.
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/2170