Back to Journals » Patient Preference and Adherence » Volume 8

Health state utilities associated with adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Authors Matza L, Devine M, Haynes VS, Davies E, Kostelec J, Televantou F, Jordan J

Received 21 February 2014

Accepted for publication 1 May 2014

Published 17 July 2014 Volume 2014:8 Pages 997—1006

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S62776

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 4


Louis S Matza,1 Mary K Devine,1 Virginia Sutton Haynes,2 Evan W Davies,3 Jacqueline M Kostelec,1 Foula Televantou,4 Jessica B Jordan1

1Outcomes Research, Evidera, Bethesda, MD, USA; 2Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA; 3Outcomes Research, Evidera, London, UK; 4Eli Lilly and Company, Windlesham, Surrey, UK

Objectives: With growing awareness of the importance of adult attention-deficit/­hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treatment, cost-effectiveness analyses, including utilities, are needed to compare the value of treatment options. Although utilities have been reported for childhood ADHD, little is known about utilities representing adult ADHD. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to estimate utilities associated with adult ADHD.
Methods: Health-state descriptions of adult ADHD were drafted based on literature review, interviews with four clinicians, and clinical trial data. Health states were revised based on a pilot study with 26 participants. Final health states were rated in time trade-off interviews with general population respondents in London and Edinburgh, UK.
Results: A total of 158 participants completed interviews (mean age =47.0 years; 49.4% female; Edinburgh =80 participants). Mean (standard deviation [SD]) utilities were 0.82 (0.17), 0.68 (0.28), and 0.67 (0.28) for health states describing treatment responders (health state A), nonresponders (health state B), and untreated patients (health state C), respectively. Most participants rated health state A as preferable to B (n=92; 58.2%) and C (n=97; 61.4%). The majority rated B and C as equal (n=125; 79.1%). Paired Student’s t-tests found that A had a significantly greater mean utility than B (t=10.0; P<0.0001) and C (t=10.2; P<0.0001).
Conclusion: The current study provides utilities that may be used in cost–utility models
of treatment for adult ADHD. Results reflected clear differences between health states ­representing treatment responders and nonresponders/untreated patients. Current utilities were comparable to those previously reported for childhood ADHD.

Keywords: adult ADHD, utility, time trade-off

Creative Commons License 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]