Gains in health utility associated with urinary catheter innovations
Received 17 February 2018
Accepted for publication 24 May 2018
Published 1 October 2018 Volume 2018:11 Pages 345—351
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewers approved by Dr Amy Norman
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Scott Fraser
Andrei Krassioukov,1,2 Yasuhiko Igawa,3 Márcio Augusto Averbeck,4 Helmut Madersbacher,5 Andrew J Lloyd,6 Mette Bøgelund,7 Nikesh Thiruchelvam8
1University of British Columbia, International Collaboration On Repair Discoveries (ICORD), Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; 2Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Medicine, G.F. Strong Rehabilitation Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; 3Department of Continence Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan; 4Head of Neuro-Urology Unit, Moinhos de Vento Hospital, Porto Alegre, Brazil; 5Department of Neurology, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria; 6Bladon Associates Ltd., Oxford, UK; 7Incentive Partners ApS, Holte, Denmark; 8Department of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK
Purpose: To estimate gains in health utility for two different catheter features and a support service related to urinary catheters used for intermittent catheterization.
Patients and methods: Two internet-based time trade-off (TTO) surveys were undertaken to value vignettes describing two innovative catheter features and a support service. The first TTO survey “Size and Service” included catheters with compact design and the availability of a support service for users; the second TTO survey “Phthalates” included avoidance of potentially harmful phthalates in the material of the catheters. All participants were from the UK; they traded health states against a time horizon that matched their total life expectancy. Sensitivity analyses were done to estimate the impact of extreme values on disutilities.
Results: The participants (n=890) estimated the incremental value of 0.031 (95% CI: 0.024–0.039), 0.009 (95% CI: 0.003–0.015), and 0.037 (95% CI: 0.027–0.046), respectively, for catheters with compact design, availability of support service, and catheters not containing phthalates.
Conclusions: Participants valued all three improvements in catheter design. To capture the impact of such design improvements on quality of life and utilities, vignette-based approaches can be a useful supplement to the conventional, generic tools.
Keywords: intermittent catheterization, time trade-off, vignette-based approach, health-related quality of life, QALY
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]