TY - JOUR
T1 - Minimizing population health loss due to scarcity in OR capacity
T2 - validation of quality of life input
AU - Gravesteijn, Benjamin Y.
AU - van Hof, Kira S.
AU - Krijkamp, Eline
AU - Asselman, Franck
AU - Leemans, C. René
AU - van Alphen, Anouk M. I. A.
AU - van der Horst, Henriëtte
AU - Widdershoven, Guy
AU - de Jong, Leonie Baatenburg
AU - Lingsma, Hester
AU - Busschbach, Jan
AU - de Jong, Rob Baatenburg
N1 - Funding Information: We would like the following people for participating in our study: Irma Verdonck, Hanna Willems, Mike Peters, Geert Kazemier, Sonja Zweegman, Steven Chamuleau, Yigal Pinto, Dink Legemate, Frank bloemers, Maartje Terra, Peter Vandertop, Jeroen van Moorselaar, Mirza Idu, Mark Kramer. Publisher Copyright: © 2023, The Author(s).
PY - 2023/12/1
Y1 - 2023/12/1
N2 - Objectives: A previously developed decision model to prioritize surgical procedures in times of scarce surgical capacity used quality of life (QoL) primarily derived from experts in one center. These estimates are key input of the model, and might be more context-dependent than the other input parameters (age, survival). The aim of this study was to validate our model by replicating these QoL estimates. Methods: The original study estimated QoL of patients in need of commonly performed procedures in live expert-panel meetings. This study replicated this procedure using a web-based Delphi approach in a different hospital. The new QoL scores were compared with the original scores using mixed effects linear regression. The ranking of surgical procedures based on combined QoL values from the validation and original study was compared to the ranking based solely on the original QoL values. Results: The overall mean difference in QoL estimates between the validation study and the original study was − 0.11 (95% CI: -0.12 - -0.10). The model output (DALY/month delay) based on QoL data from both studies was similar to the model output based on the original data only: The Spearman’s correlation coefficient between the ranking of all procedures before and after including the new QoL estimates was 0.988. Discussion: Even though the new QoL estimates were systematically lower than the values from the original study, the ranking for urgency based on health loss per unit of time delay of procedures was consistent. This underscores the robustness and generalizability of the decision model for prioritization of surgical procedures.
AB - Objectives: A previously developed decision model to prioritize surgical procedures in times of scarce surgical capacity used quality of life (QoL) primarily derived from experts in one center. These estimates are key input of the model, and might be more context-dependent than the other input parameters (age, survival). The aim of this study was to validate our model by replicating these QoL estimates. Methods: The original study estimated QoL of patients in need of commonly performed procedures in live expert-panel meetings. This study replicated this procedure using a web-based Delphi approach in a different hospital. The new QoL scores were compared with the original scores using mixed effects linear regression. The ranking of surgical procedures based on combined QoL values from the validation and original study was compared to the ranking based solely on the original QoL values. Results: The overall mean difference in QoL estimates between the validation study and the original study was − 0.11 (95% CI: -0.12 - -0.10). The model output (DALY/month delay) based on QoL data from both studies was similar to the model output based on the original data only: The Spearman’s correlation coefficient between the ranking of all procedures before and after including the new QoL estimates was 0.988. Discussion: Even though the new QoL estimates were systematically lower than the values from the original study, the ranking for urgency based on health loss per unit of time delay of procedures was consistent. This underscores the robustness and generalizability of the decision model for prioritization of surgical procedures.
KW - Decision modeling
KW - Prioritization
KW - Quality of life
KW - Surgery
KW - Validation
KW - Value based health care
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85147167651&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01818-z
DO - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01818-z
M3 - Article
C2 - 36721106
SN - 1471-2288
VL - 23
JO - BMC medical research methodology
JF - BMC medical research methodology
IS - 1
M1 - 31
ER -