Health state utilities of a population of Nigerian hypertensive patients

BMC Research Notes

Chioma J Onwuka³  Ebenezer Barikpaoar²  Maxwell O Adibe¹  Cletus N Aguwa¹  Obinna I Ekwunife² 

[1] Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacy Management, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Nigeria Nsukka, Nsukka, Enugu, Nigeria;Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research Team, Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacy Management, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Nigeria Nsukka, Nsukka, Enugu, Nigeria;The School of Pharmacy, University of London, 29/39 Brunswick Square, London WC1N 1AX, UK

关键词: Nigeria;    Validation;    Cardiovascular disease (CVD);    Hypertension;    Quality of life;   

Others  :  1166896
DOI  :  10.1186/1756-0500-4-528

 received in 2011-07-25, accepted in 2011-12-12,  发布年份 2011

【 摘 要 】

Background

Establishment of the health impact of hypertension on quality of life of Nigerians is a step towards controlling the disease. The study aimed to provide a Nigerian specific reference list of utility scores of hypertensive patients with various interacting conditions.

Findings

An interviewer-based, cross-sectional study was conducted using hypertensive patients in two purposively selected tertiary hospitals located in South-Eastern Nigeria. Health Utility Index Mark 3 (HUI3) was used.

A total of 384 participants with either hypertension alone or with hypertension-associated complications were interviewed in the two tertiary hospitals.

The overall mean utility score was 0.35 +/- 0.42. Patients with hypertension alone had the highest overall mean utility score (0.57 +/- 0.29) while hypertensive patients with stroke had the lowest overall mean score (0.04 +/- 0.36). Being a male, increase in age and mean arterial blood pressure, emergency visit and loss of work due to illness were associated with significant decrease in overall utility scores.

Conclusions

This study presented a reference for health state utilities of a population of Nigerian hypertensive patients.

【 授权许可】

   
2011 Ekwunife et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Chobian A, Bakris J, Black H, Cushman W, Green L, Izzo J, et al.: Seventh report of the joint National Committee on prevention, detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressure: the JNC 7 report of American Medical Association. 2003, 11:2890-2560.
• [2]Steyn K, Sliwa K, Hawken S, Commerford P, Onen C, Damasceno A, et al.: Risk factors associated with myocardial infarction in Africa: the INTERHEART Africa study. Circulation 2005, 112:3554-3561.
• [3]WHO: Prospects of research on non-communicable diseases in the African sub-region. World Health Organization. [http://www.afro.who.int/dpm/rpc/publicaations/ncdwok.pdf] webcite 2008. Accessed 12 May
• [4]Khor G: Cardiovascular epidemiology in the Asia-Pacific region. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr 2001, 76-80.
• [5]Vorster H: The emergence of cardiovascular disease during urbanisation of Africans. Public Health Nutr 2002, 239-243.
• [6]Addo J, Smeeth L, Leon DA: Hypertension in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review. Hypertension 2007, 50:1012-1018.
• [7]Ekwunife O, Aguwa C: Increasing prevalence of hypertension in Nigeria: A systematic review from 1999-2009. Value Health 2010, 13(7):A239-A573.
• [8]Saseen JJ: Essential hypertension. In Applied Therapeutics: The Clinical Use of Drugs. 9th edition. Edited by Koda-Kimble MA, Young LY, Alldredge BK et al.. Lipponcott Williams & Wilkins; 13p7.
• [9]Maddigan SL, Feeny DH, Johnson JA: Construct validity of the RAND-12 and health utilities index mark 2 and 3 in type 2 diabetes. Qual Life Res 2004, 13:435-488.
• [10]Feeny DH, Furlong WJ, Torrance GW, et al.: Health utilities index: multi-attribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system. Med Care 2002, 40(2):113-128.
• [11]Feeny D, Furlong W, Boyle M, Torrance GW: Multi-attribute health status classification systems: health utilities index. Pharmacoeconomics 1995, 7:490-502.
• [12]Kaplan R, Bush J, Berry C: Health status: types of validity and the index of well-being. Health Serv Res 1976, 11:478-507.
• [13]The EuroQol Group: EuroQol-a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990, 16:199-208.
• [14]Torrance G, Boyle M, Horword S: Application of multiattribute utility theory to measure social preferences for health states. Operat Res 1982, 30:1043-1069.
• [15]Mittmann N, Trakas K, Risebrough N, Liu B: Utility scores for chronic conditions in a community-dwelling population. Pharmacoeconomics 1999, 15(4):369-376.
• [16]Chong C, Li S, Nguyen G, Sutton A, Levy M, Butler T, et al.: Health-state utilities in a prisoner population: a cross-sectional survey. Health Qual Life Out 2009., 7(78) doi:10.1186/1477-7525-7-78
• [17]Bisegger C, Cloetta B, Bisegger U, Abel T, Ravens-Sieberer U, European Kidscreen group: Health-related quality of life: gender differences in childhood and adolescence. Social and preventive medicine 50(5):289-291.
• [18]Riedinger MS, Dracup KA, Brecht M, Padilla G, Sarna L, SOLVD Investigators, et al.: Quality of life patients with heart failure: do gender differences exist? heart & lung. The Journal of Acute and Critical Care 30(2):105-116.
• [19]Grootendorst P, Feeny D, William F: Health utilities index mark 3: evidence of construct validity for stroke and arthritis in a population health survey. Med Care 38(3):290-299.