Abstract
PurposeThe objective of this study was to estimate the association between SF-12v2® Health Survey (SF-12v2) scores and subsequent health care resource utilization (HCRU) among patients with cancer.MethodsWe analyzed 18+ year participants in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, diagnosed with active cancer or malignancy (n = 647). HCRU was measured by total medical expenditures (MEs) and number of medical events (EVs) in the 6 months following the SF-12v2 assessment. The effect of SF-12v2 scores (physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component summary scores and the SF-6D health-utility score) on HCRU was estimated using generalized linear models. Estimates were obtained for the entire sample and for the four cancer groups present in the sample: breast, prostate, skin, and lung.ResultsFor PCS and MCS, a one-point better score was associated with 2% lower MEs (P < 0.001) and 2.5% lower MEs (P = 0.015), respectively. A 0.05-point better SF-6D score was associated with 7% lower MEs (P = 0.003). PCS and SF-6D were more strongly associated with MEs for prostate cancer patients (P = 0.009 and P = 0.003) and PCS was more strongly associated with MEs for skin cancer patients (P = 0.019), compared to other cancer groups. A 1-point better PCS predicted 1% lower EVs, while a 0.05 better SF-6D score predicted 4% lower EVs.ConclusionsThe significant associations between SF-12v2 scores from oncology patients and subsequent HCRU can guide interpretations of SF-12v2 scores in evaluation of therapies and in health policy decisions.
Highlights
The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality estimated that in 2014 the cost of oncology health care in the United States (US) was $87 billion [1]
This study found that prostate cancer reported the highest functioning (PCS), MCS, and SF-6D scores from the SF-12v2 can be used to predict total medical expenditures (MEs) for patients with cancer
A one-point higher PCS or MCS score was associated with approximately 2% lower MEs, while a 0.05 difference in SF-6D was associated with 9.5% lower MEs
Summary
The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality estimated that in 2014 the cost of oncology health care in the United States (US) was $87 billion [1]. Various factors have contributed to an increase in total medical expenditures (MEs) [2] bringing about a pressing need to conduct comparative evaluations of medical interventions. Such value-based appraisals of therapies are rapidly becoming an integral part of the body of evidence informing reimbursement decisions. Linking PRO scores to real-world outcomes has the potential to further their use in clinical settings [5,6,7], creating opportunities for collaborative decision-making between patients and health care providers [8, 9]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call