Citation

Pyne JM, French M, McCollister K, Tripathi S, Rapp R, Booth B. Addiction 2008; 103(8): 1320-1329.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2008, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02153.x

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Aims  Examine the validity of preference‐weighted health‐related quality of life measures in a sample of substance use disorder (SUD) patients. The implications of cost–utility analyses (CUAs) of SUD interventions are discussed.

Design  Cross‐sectional analysis of subjects seeking SUD treatment.

Setting  Seven SUD treatment centers in a medium‐sized Midwestern metropolitan area in the United States.

Participants  Data from 574 SUD subjects were analyzed from a study to test interventions to improve linkage and engagement with substance abuse treatment.

Measurements  Subjects completed the following preference‐weighted measures: self‐administered Quality of Well‐Being scale (QWB‐SA) and Medical Outcomes Study SF‐12 (standard gamble weighted or SF‐12 SG); and clinical measures: Addiction Severity Index (ASI) and a symptom checklist based on the DSM‐IV.

Findings  In unadjusted analyses, the QWB‐SA was correlated significantly with six of seven ASI subscales and the SF‐12 SG was correlated with four of seven. In adjusted analyses, both preference‐weighted measures were significantly correlated with diagnostic, physical health, mental health and drug use measures, but not with legal or alcohol use measures. The QWB‐SA was also correlated with employment problems and the SF‐12 SG was correlated with family/social problems.

Conclusions  This study generally supports the construct validity of preference‐weighted health‐related quality of life measures in SUD patients. However, the QWB‐SA and SF‐12 SG did not correlate with all ASI scales. Cost–benefit analysis may be preferable when policy‐makers are interested in evaluating the full range of SUD intervention outcomes.