Reference : Utility values associated with osteoporotic fracture: a systematic review of the lite...
Scientific journals : Article
Human health sciences : Public health, health care sciences & services
Business & economic sciences : Special economic topics (health, labor, transportation…)
Utility values associated with osteoporotic fracture: a systematic review of the literature.
Hiligsmann, Mickaël mailto [Université de Liège - ULiège > HEC - École de gestion de l'ULiège > Economie industrielle >]
Ethgen, Olivier mailto [Université de Liège - ULiège > Département des sciences de la santé publique > Santé publique : aspects spécifiques >]
Richy, Florent [> > > >]
Reginster, Jean-Yves mailto [Université de Liège - ULiège > Département des sciences de la santé publique > Epidémiologie et santé publique >]
Calcified Tissue International
Yes (verified by ORBi)
United States
[en] Databases, Bibliographic ; Fractures, Bone/complications/diagnosis ; Humans ; Osteoporosis/complications/diagnosis ; Quality-Adjusted Life Years ; Questionnaires ; Reference Values ; Research Design ; Time Factors ; Treatment Outcome
[en] We reviewed studies that have estimated the impact of osteoporotic fracture on quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and to determine reference values for countries that would like to carry out cost-utility analyses but that do not have their own values. The computerized medical literature databases Medline and EMBASE were searched from January 1990 to December 2006. The search was carried out in two steps. The first step was to identify studies that related to quality of life in osteoporosis. As part of the second step, only the studies that translated quality of life into a utility value (one single value for health status ranging 0-1) and calculated a utility loss over a period of at least 1 year were selected. From the 152 studies identified in the first analysis, only 16 were retained after the second step. Ten studies investigated utility values for hip fractures, 11 for vertebral fractures, five for distal forearm fractures, and four for other osteoporotic fractures and fracture interactions. Utility values differed substantially between studies, partly due to the valuation technique used, the severity of fractures, and the sample size. This review suggests that there is no meaningful average value across different studies, different samples, different countries, or different instruments. Although we tried to determine the best available values, these values do not preclude the need for country-specific studies. Finally, we also make recommendations regarding the design and methodology for such studies.

File(s) associated to this reference

Fulltext file(s):

Restricted access
CTI_Hiligsmann.pdfNo commentaryPublisher postprint121.91 kBRequest copy

Bookmark and Share SFX Query

All documents in ORBi are protected by a user license.