SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • 15D;
  • allergy;
  • asthma;
  • health-related quality of life;
  • rhinoconjunctivitis;
  • Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Methods
  4. Results
  5. Discussion
  6. Acknowledgments
  7. References
  8. Appendix
  9. Supporting Information

Background:  Illness as perceived by the allergic patient with asthma and/or rhinoconjunctivitis (RC) can be assessed by measurements of their health-related quality of life (HRQL). For this purpose the RC Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) has gained general acceptance; however, as most allergic patients experience symptoms from multiple organs, disease-specific HRQL measures may be deficient. This study compares a generic and a disease-specific HRQL instrument in grass and/or mite-allergic patients.

Methods:  Two hundred and forty-eight patients with RC and 121 patients with both RC and asthma were studied. Questionnaire information was obtained about allergy-related RQLQ and a generic 15-dimensional instrument for measuring HRQL (15D). Doctors provided general and disease-specific information to classify disease severity according to the global initiative for asthma and allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma guidelines.

Results:  Rhinoconjunctivitis patients with persistent moderate-to-severe disease had an impaired quality of life on all items of RQLQ during allergen exposure. The 15D mean score was 0.98 on a day without allergy and 0.83 on a day with allergy (P < 0.001). The correlation between 15D and RQLQ was r = −0.42 on a day with allergy (P < 0.001). Only 15D scores showed statistically significant differences in HRQL between patients with and without asthma.

Conclusion:  During allergen exposure patients with RC experience a serious deterioration in HRQL measured with the disease-specific RQLQ instrument and the generic 15D instrument. The 15D instrument seems to generate a more comprehensive view of the impact of allergen exposure on patient’s quality of life than RQLQ.

Abbreviations:
15D

15-dimensional instrument for measuring health-related quality of life

ARIA

allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma

HRQL

health-related quality of life

RC

rhinoconjunctivitis

RQLQ

Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire

SCIT

subcutaneous injection immunotherapy

SF

short form

Allergy to airborne particles results in co-morbid conditions with symptoms from eyes, nose, and lungs. Up to 40% of the patients with rhinitis also have asthma, and up to 80% of the patients with asthma experience nasal symptoms. The two conditions can be regarded as an allergic respiratory syndrome (1–3). Allergic asthma and rhinoconjunctivitis (RC) are common respiratory diseases. In Europe, approximately 25% of the population suffers from respiratory allergy. The prevalence of asthma and RC has increased in industrialized countries over the past decades, and thus, allergies constitute a public health problem (4, 5). The allergic diseases impair physical, psychological, and cognitive functions, and the impact on the patient’s health-related quality of life (HRQL) is frequently underestimated. Interventions against respiratory allergy include symptomatic treatment, allergen avoidance, and allergen-specific immunotherapy.

It is widely acknowledged that the personal burden of illness, as perceived by the allergic asthma and/or RC patient, cannot be fully assessed by traditional clinical symptoms and signs correlating only moderately with patients’ perceptions and functional capabilities on a daily basis (6, 7). Specific instruments, such as the RC Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), have gained acceptance as methods to obtain a measure of disease perception in adults with RC (8, 9). Generic HRQL instruments have only been examined sporadically in allergy (10–14), and to our knowledge never with the generic 15-dimensional instrument for measuring HRQL (15D) instrument (15).

Specific instruments focus on health outcomes related to a specific disease, medical condition, or patient population. They concentrate on dimensions (or domains) of HRQL that are most relevant to the disease in question. The specific instruments are more responsive to changes in the particular disease-related aspect of the patient’s HRQL compared to generic instruments, which focus on the patient’s general health. Furthermore, it is likely that patients and physicians consider these instruments more relevant compared to generic instruments (16, 17). The main disadvantage of specific instruments is that they cannot be used to compare the quality of life across different diseases and patient types, and therefore cannot be used to compare the relative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of programs in different disease areas. RQLQ is a validated and reliable instrument, but it does not produce a single quality of life score, but rather a profile of scores across different domains. In addition, scoring is not based on individual preferences for the various possible outcomes. Consequently, it is not clear whether high scores are associated with outcomes that are more or less preferred by the patient.

Generic instruments are broad-based measurements that can assess general HRQL over different disease states and conditions, treatment interventions, and population states. Generic instruments allow comparison of HRQL for different disease states, such as allergic RC, asthma, hypertension, and diabetes. Typically, they include consideration of physical functioning, ability for self-care, physiological status, level of pain or distress, and amount of social integration. Generic instruments can also serve as health profiles. The major disadvantage of generic instruments is the inclusion of items not relevant to the disease, and furthermore, the sensitivity may not be sufficient to differentiate between different levels of quality of life within a particular disease. Examples of generic instruments are the short form (SF) 36, the Nottingham Health Profile, the Sickness Impact Profile, the EQ-5D (18, 19), and the 15D. Only generic instruments based on public preferences, such as the EQ-5D and 15D can serve as a basis for comparison of the cost-effectiveness of programs in different disease areas. The 15D instrument for HRQL contains both a profile and a utility measure.

The present study compares results obtained by using the disease-specific RQLQ and the generic 15D instrument in the same population of adult allergic patients enrolled for subcutaneous injection immunotherapy (SCIT) against grass and/or house dust mites, so the impact of seasonal allergen exposure could be investigated. Previous studies have reported a relationship between disease severity and use of medication and health care services (20–22). The aim of the current study was to address a potential correlation between disease-specific and generic HRQL and disease severity classification of hay fever and asthma.

Methods

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Methods
  4. Results
  5. Discussion
  6. Acknowledgments
  7. References
  8. Appendix
  9. Supporting Information

Data sources

The study had a cross-sectional, observational design. It was a multi-center study with patients recruited consecutively from 13 clinics that specialized in specific allergy management. Data were collected immediately before SCIT was initiated. The patients were referred to the specialist clinics by general practitioners for treatment of grass pollen and/or house dust mite allergy. The patients had to be at least 16 years of age. Data were collected by using specifically designed questionnaires for the doctors and for the patients.

Doctor’s questionnaire

The specialist doctors provided information about the patients’ general health, disease duration, and data on lung function, as well as specificity of their allergy and immunotherapy treatment. Furthermore, the doctors classified RC severity according to the allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma (ARIA) as intermittent or persistent and as mild or moderate-to-severe (2, 23). Doctors classified asthma according to the global initiative for asthma guideline as intermittent, mild persistent, moderate persistent or severe persistent (24, 25).

Patients’ questionnaires

The patient questionnaire included the RQLQ and 15D instruments. RC Quality of Life Questionnaire has 28 questions or items distributed across seven domains. The domain score is the average score within each domain. Each item has seven levels on an ordinal scale with zero denoting ‘Not troubled’ and six ‘Extremely troubled’. Patients were asked to fill in the RQLQ items for a typical day with allergic symptoms, instead of the last week as prescribed by the standard RQLQ.

The 15D questionnaire is a generic self-administered multi-attribute HRQL measure (15, 26) assessing health status across 15 dimensions: mobility, vision, hearing, breathing, sleeping, eating, speech, eliminations, usual activities, mental function, discomfort and symptoms, depression, distress, vitality, and sexual activity (27, 28). Each dimension has five levels, ranging from level one indicating no problems in the dimension (e.g. able to walk normally indoors, outdoors, and on stairs) to level five signifying extreme problems (e.g. completely bed-ridden and unable to move about). A single index score was obtained by incorporating Danish population based preference weights (29, 30).

For the 15D items, respondents were asked to report their general health state on a typical day with allergy symptoms as well as on a typical day without allergy symptoms, instead of today as prescribed by the standard 15D. Asking respondents to report their HRQL in both settings enables estimation of the potential impact of allergy interventions in a later stage. For a detailed description of the questionnaire, see Appendix S1 and Appendix A.

Statistical analyses

Statistical analyses were performed using stata 9.2 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA) and spss (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) for Windows 14.0. Chi-squared tests were used to test differences on categorical variables. Student’s t tests were used to compare mean values on continuous variables. Graph bars were drawn for the RQLQ items and for the 15D items including a day with allergy as well as a day without allergy. Normally distributed data were analyzed using matched pairs t-test. Wilcoxon-signed rank test was used for ordinal paired variables (31).

We conducted linear regression of RQLQ and 15D on gender, age, SCIT modality, hay fever severity, and asthma severity using a 5% significance level. To test if missing values occurring with the RQLQ instrument influenced the results of the regression analysis and to enable comparison directly with the 15D instrument a RQLQ-missing dummy variable (=1, 0 otherwise) was used.

Observations, where all dichotomous variables were zero, represented the reference patient for the analysis. Thus, the reference person in the regression model was a male, vaccinated against grass pollen, and classified as ‘no or mild hay fever’ without asthma. The correlation between the 15D score and the RQLQ score was assessed using the Pearson’s correlation coefficient (32).

Ethical considerations

The study was approved by the Danish Data Agency (2005-41-5534). The scientific ethics committee did not find that the project needed permission from their committee.

Results

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Methods
  4. Results
  5. Discussion
  6. Acknowledgments
  7. References
  8. Appendix
  9. Supporting Information

The study included 254 grass and/or house dust mite allergic patients, who were referred to specialist centers with an indication to start SCIT between September 2005 and December 2006. One hundred and twenty-nine of the participants were men. One hundred and seventy patients were about to start SCIT with grass pollen alone, 30 were about to start SCIT with house dust mites only, and 54 were about to start vaccination against both grass pollen and house dust mite (Table 1).

Table 1.   Categorization of the patients by vaccination modality
 Vaccination with grass pollen extract only, (n = 170)Vaccination with house dust mite extract only, (n = 30)Vaccination with grass pollen and house dust mite extracts, (n = 54) Total (n = 254)
  1. Figures represent number of patients (percentages in parenthesis) except if stated otherwise.

Male92 (54.1)10 (33.3)27 (50.0)129 (51.0)
Female78 (45.9)20 (66.7)27 (49.1)125 (49.0)
Mean (SD) age in year [range in year]33.4 (10.4) [16.1–64.4]35.3 (9.4) [21.6–59.8]33.2 (12.5) [16.1–66.3]33.6 (10.8) [16.1–66.3]
Mean (SD) years with doctor diagnosed allergy [range in year]15.0 (10.0) [1–44]11.2 (9.6) [1–40]14.0 (10.3) [1–45]14.0 [1–45]
Mean (SD) years with self-reported allergy [range in year]18.0 (11.1) [0–47]14.3 (10.3) [0–41]17.2 (12.9) [3–54]17.4 (11.4) [0–54]

There were no significant gender differences concerning the allergens with which vaccination was going to be initiated. Two hundred and forty-eight (97.3%) of the patients were diagnosed as RC patients, among those 127 (49.8%) were diagnosed as suffering from RC only. Six (2.4%) were diagnosed as bronchial asthma only and 121 (47.5%) of the patients were diagnosed as both RC and bronchial asthma (Table 2). The mean self-reported disease duration was 17.4 years. The doctors reported the mean time since diagnosis as 14.0 years. Hence, the average allergic patient in this study had suffered from allergic symptoms for 3.4 years prior to a doctor’s diagnosis (Table 1).

Table 2.   Baseline diagnosis of the rhinoconjunctivitis patients according to ARIA and the asthma patients according to the GINA guidelines by vaccination modality
 Vaccination with grass pollen extract only, 170Vaccination with house dust mite extract only, 30Vaccination with grass pollen and house dust mite extracts, 54Total 254
  1. Figures represent number of patients (percentages in parenthesis).

  2. ARIA, allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma; GINA, the global initiative for asthma.

Rhinoconjunctivitis
 No rhinoconjunctivitis diagnosis1 (0.6)5 (13.6)06 (2.4)
 Intermittent mild2 (1.2)3 (10.0)1 (1.9)6 (2.4)
 Intermittent moderate to-severe5 (2.9)1 (3.3)3 (5.6)9 (3.5)
 Persistent mild12 (7.1)09 (16.7)21 (8.3)
 Persistent moderate-to-severe150 (88.2)21 (73.1)41 (75.9)212 (83.5)
Asthma diagnosis
 No asthma diagnosis88 (51.8)13 (43.3)27 (49.1)128 (50.4)
 Intermittent 29 (17.1)6 (20.0)7 (12.7)42 (16.5)
 Mild persistent 21 (12.4)1 (3.3)6 (10.9)28 (11.0)
 Moderate persistent 29 (17.1)8 (26.7)11 (20.0)48 (18.9)
 Severe persistent 3 (1.8)2 (6.7)4 (7.3)9 (3.5)

Regression analyses of RQLQ and 15D, respectively on a typical day with allergy, on gender, age, vaccination modality, and disease severity are presented in Table 3. In the regression analysis, we omitted the six patients who were suffering from asthma only to simplify the interpretation of the coefficient associated with asthma (which then reflects the added health consequences of having asthma in addition to RC).

Table 3.   Regression analysis of RQLQ and 15D on gender, age, vaccination modality, hay fever severity, and asthma severity on a typical day with allergy
 RQLQ-overall15D
CoefficientSEP-valueCoefficientRobust SEP-value
  1. RQLQ, rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire; 15D, 15-dimensional instrument for measuring health-related quality of life; n.a., not applicable

Female0.31370.13190.019−0.02790.00990.005
Age (years)−0.00150.00620.8060.00090.00040.031
Vaccination against house dust mite0.05510.23180.812−0.03250.01840.079
Vaccination against house dust mite and grass−0.71710.15980.0000.00080.01200.946
Hay fever moderate-to-severe0.40260.20560.052−0.04150.01280.001
Asthma mild−0.12780.15210.402−0.02260.01120.045
Asthma moderate-to-severe−0.24130.16750.152−0.04570.01370.001
RQLQ-missingn.a.n.a.n.a.0.01830.01080.090
Constant2.90810.29210.0000.85640.02030.000
No of observations170240

Females reported statistically significantly lower HRQL scores compared to men on both instruments. The sign of the coefficients to the covariate age were in accordance on the two instruments. On the 15D instrument, an increasing age was statistically significantly associated with a higher HRQL score on a day with allergy. Both instruments produced statistically significantly different scores for patients classified as ‘no or mild’ RC and those classified as ’moderate-to-severe’. The RQLQ did not differentiate between patients as those with or without asthma and between different severities of asthma. The 15D questionnaire on the other hand showed a statistically significant difference between patients with and without asthma (Table 3).

On the RQLQ instrument, the respondents reported statistically significantly higher quality of life if they were about to start SCIT with both grass pollen and house dust mites as compared to patients that were about to start SCIT with grass pollen only (P = 0.000).

All 15 items on the generic 15D questionnaire comparing a typical day without allergy with a typical day with allergy is presented in Fig. 1. The respondents hardly had any problems on a day without allergy measured with 15D. On a day with allergy, however, the scores were statistically significantly higher on the five digit ordinal scale (P < 0.001) for all 15 items meaning that HRQL on a day with allergy was statistically significantly lower compared to a day with no allergy. The mean utility score on a day with no allergy was 0.98 (SD 0.03) compared to 0.83 (0.08) on a day with allergy. The difference between the scores was 0.15 (0.07) (P < 0.001).

image

Figure 1.  15D profile of patients (n = 254) screened to SCIT on a day without allergy (−A), and on a day with allergy (+A).

Download figure to PowerPoint

The ‘overall’ mean score on a day with allergy on the RQLQ instrument was 3.1 (0.9). The domain item ‘activity’ had the highest mean score of 4.4 (1.2) meaning it was the item affecting the respondents most. The item ‘sleep’ had the lowest mean score of 2.1 (1.6) meaning that it was the item least affecting the respondents on the RQLQ instrument (Fig. 2).

image

Figure 2.  RQLQ profile of patients (n = 254) screened to SCIT on a typical day with allergy. The domain item ‘activities’ are illustrated by the bars activity1–3. Respondents made a choice between 29 different activities, which were limited by their nose/eye symptoms. The domain item ‘sleep’ is illustrated by the bars sleep1–3: sleep1, difficulties getting to sleep; sleep2, wake up during night; sleep3, lack of good night’s sleep. The domain item ‘Non-nose/eye symptoms’ is illustrated by the bars 7–13. The domain item ‘Practical problems’ is illustrated by the bars 14–16: 14, inconvenience of having to carry tissues or handkerchief; 15, need to rub nose/eyes; 16, need to blow nose repeatedly. The domain item ‘nasal symptoms’ are illustrated by the bars 17–20. The domain item ‘eye symptoms’ is illustrated by the bars 21–24, and the domain item ‘emotional’ is illustrated by the bars 25–28. (For a detailed description see Appendix A.

Download figure to PowerPoint

On all domain items on the RQLQ instrument, women reported a lower HRQL. For the five domain items and the overall-score, the difference between gender was statistically significant (P ≤ 0.05). On 12 out of 15 items on the 15D instrument, women had a lower HRQL score as compared to men. On the six items ‘mobility’, ‘breathing’, ‘sleeping’, ‘elimination’, ‘depression’, and ‘vitality’, this HRQL was significantly lower compared to that of males (P ≤ 0.05).

According to the ARIA classification, all RQLQ domain items, (with the exception of the ‘emotional’ item), the patients classified as ‘moderate-to-severe’ RC had statistically significantly lower HRQL, as compared to patients classified as ‘no or mild’ RC (P < 0.05). The utility scores on the 15D instrument measured the same difference between these two severity groups (P = 0.01) on a day with allergy, whereas on a day with no allergy there was no difference (P = 0.99). On 13 out of 15 items on the 15D instrument patients diagnosed with ‘moderate-to-severe’ RC had lower HRQL scores as compared to patients diagnosed with ‘no or mild’ RC. On the items ‘mobility’, ‘breathing’, ‘sleeping’, and ‘vitality’ the scores were statistically significantly lower (P ≤ 0.05), indicating that the 15D instrument was capable of differentiating patients according to disease severity.

On a typical day with allergy there was a negative correlation between the two instruments as shown in Fig 3. The correlation between the 15D score and the RQLQ overall score was r = −0.42 (P < 0.001). The correlation between the seven RQLQ domain items and the 15D items was assessed to see which domains were linked Table 4.

image

Figure 3.  RQLQ score dependent of 15D utility score on a day with allergy (n = 168).

Download figure to PowerPoint

Table 4.   Correlation between 15D items and RQLQ domain items on a day with allergy
15D itemsRQLQ domain items
Activity (n = 180)Sleep (n = 244)Non-nose/eye symptoms (n = 243)Practical problems (n = 246)Nose problems (n = 242)Eye problems (n = 245)Emotions (n = 245)RQLQ Overall (n = 168)
  1. RQLQ, rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire; 15D, 15-dimensional instrument for measuring health-related quality of life.

  2. *Significantly correlated items P < 0.05.

Mobility0.100.13*0.25*0.040.030.110.13*0.06
Vision0.21*0.15*0.24*0.21*0.16*0.33*0.31*0.29*
Hearing−0.000.040.11−0.020.030.020.040.09
Breathing0.070.34*0.31*−0.020.080.100.100.20*
Sleep0.120.67*0.26*0.020.14*0.100.15*0.31*
Eating0.010.030.110.100.020.060.13*0.07
Speech−0.26*0.040.09−0.18*−0.04−0.010.06−0.11
Elimination−0.090.020.14*−0.070.020.020.07−0.07
Usual activities0.28*0.16*0.46*0.16*0.21*0.21*0.36*0.37*
Mental function0.140.14*0.41*0.100.17*0.21*0.31*0.19*
Discomfort0.30*0.090.30*0.22*0.21*0.38*0.39*0.38*
Depression−0.020.060.29*0.050.030.110.45*0.23*
Distress0.030.060.36*0.030.030.13*0.40*0.26*
Vitality0.27*0.23*0.54*0.150.19*0.24*0.43*0.41*
Sexual activity0.16*0.17*0.44*0.040.16*0.16*0.30*0.32*
15D-score−0.19*−0.33*−0.58*−0.11−0.19*−0.32*−0.49*−0.42*

Discussion

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Methods
  4. Results
  5. Discussion
  6. Acknowledgments
  7. References
  8. Appendix
  9. Supporting Information

In recent years, it has become increasingly clear that co-morbid disease conditions are the rule rather than the exception in allergy. Allergic patients exclusively suffering from asthma are rare. Although this is not an epidemiological study, only six out of 254 patients included did not show signs of RC. According to the ‘one airway, one disease’ concept introduced in the ARIA document, allergy is a systemic condition in the immune system and asthma and RC can be considered local manifestations of this underlying immunological condition.

The 15D instrument demonstrated that allergy affects all dimensions of life, signified by a statistically significant movement on all 15 items on a day of allergy. The 15D and the RQLQ instruments both showed a statistically significantly lower HRQL for women. Patients diagnosed with ‘moderate-to-severe’ RC had a statistically significantly lower HRQL than patients with ‘no or mild’ RC. This was found for all items on both instruments, confirming the hypothesis that a more severe RC diagnosis correlates with a lower HRQL. On the 15D instrument higher age was statistically significantly associated with a higher HRQL score. This was not observed on the disease-specific RQLQ instrument. This result suggests that older people are better at coping with their allergy, a factor which is not captured by the RQLQ instrument.

In this study, the patients were interviewed just prior to the start of SCIT treatment. To the extent that respondents have an inclination to justify their choice of SCIT by exaggerating their symptoms on a day with allergy, this may bias the presented results. Another potential source of bias in the study was that the patients were self-selected to the study; hence they are unlikely to be representative of the population of allergy patients. There was no possibility, however, of a baseline analysis, as patients were enrolled only when appearing at the specialist center for the purpose of initiating SCIT treatment.

Patients filled in the questionnaires as they recalled a typical day caused by allergy and a typical day without allergic symptoms. Although this method may have introduced recall bias as compared to studies in and out of the pollen season, results obtained in this study (RQLQ-overall score = 3.1) did not differ substantially compared to previous studies (9, 33, 34).

This study shows that is was possible to measure a difference in the HRQL on the generic preference-based 15D utility instrument among allergic patients, and that the burden of disease was significant for this particular group of patients. The correlation analysis of the two instruments showed that they were statistically significantly correlated; the correlation coefficient was (−0.42). Analysis of correlations between the two instruments dimensions generally showed coefficients of equal or lower magnitude (Table 4). Interestingly, those 15D dimensions which appeared to be most sensitive to HRQL changes amongst the allergy/asthma patients did not correlate strongly with any of the RQLQ dimensions, suggesting that there are elements of HRQL which are not adequately captured by the RQLQ instrument. What is also clear is that the RQLQ dimensions ‘Non-nose/eye symptoms’ and ‘Emotions’ are most markedly associated with general HRQL.

In accordance with the previous studies, we found that the RQLQ scores do not differ statistically significantly across patients both with and without an asthma diagnosis RC Quality of Life Questionnaire is a tool developed for specific evaluation of patients suffering from RC. In the light of the ‘one airway, one disease’ concept, this can be regarded as a major shortcoming. A comprehensive assessment of allergic RC patients needs not only to take symptoms from the nose and eyes into consideration, but also symptoms from the lungs. The understanding of allergy being a systemic, immunological condition underlying asthma and RC has only surfaced recently; however, the present study seems to suggest that it has implications for HRQL assessment. For many years the common use of the RQLQ may have underestimated the real burden of disease in patients with allergic RC, as symptoms from the lungs were ignored by the RQLQ, although these are present in a large proportion of the RC patients. The present study indicates that the generic instrument 15D is capable of providing a more balanced view of the HRQL impairment in patients suffering from inhalation allergy.

The 15D instrument and the RQLQ instrument were capable of differentiating RC patients across different disease severities. The 15D instrument was, in addition, capable of differentiating asthma patients from nonasthma patients. The 15D appears to be able to capture dimensions of HRQL, which are not incorporated in the RQLQ. One of the strengths of the 15D instrument is that the total score is a weighted average across several dimensions, with the assignment of relative weightages based on the public preferences. In contrast, the RQLQ score is based on an unweighted average, which implicitly assumes equal weightage. Hence, a comparison of RQLQ scores across health states which involve problems on more than one dimension may be invalid.

An additional advantage of including generic instruments (such as the 15D) in evaluations of interventions targeted at allergy patients is that such measures are preference-based, allowing for calculation of quality adjusted life-years. The quality adjusted life-year is a generic outcome measure. Such evaluations represent a useful tool for decision makers and may be a valuable input for optimizing the resource allocation across different patient groups.

Acknowledgments

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Methods
  4. Results
  5. Discussion
  6. Acknowledgments
  7. References
  8. Appendix
  9. Supporting Information

The funding for this study was provided by ALK-Abelló A/S and the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Methods
  4. Results
  5. Discussion
  6. Acknowledgments
  7. References
  8. Appendix
  9. Supporting Information
  • 1
    Corren J. Allergic rhinitis and asthma: how important is the link? J Allergy Clin Immunol 1997;99:S781S786.
  • 2
    Bousquet J, Van Cauwenberge P, Khaltaev N. Allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2001;5(Suppl):S147S334.
  • 3
    Pawankar R. Allergic rhinitis and asthma: are they manifestations of one syndrome? Clin Exp Allergy 2006;36:14.
  • 4
    Beasley R, Crane J, Lai CK, Pearce N. Prevalence and etiology of asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2000;105:S466S472.
  • 5
    Linneberg A, Nielsen NH, Madsen F, Frolund L, Dirksen A, Jorgensen T. Increasing prevalence of specific IgE to aeroallergens in an adult population: two cross-sectional surveys 8 years apart: the Copenhagen Allergy Study. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2000;106:247252.
  • 6
    Muldoon MF, Barger SD, Flory JD, Manuck SB. What are quality of life measurements measuring? BMJ 1998;316:542545.
  • 7
    Jones PW. Quality of life measurement in asthma. Eur Respir J 1995;8:885887.
  • 8
    Juniper EF, Guyatt GH. Development and testing of a new measure of health status for clinical trials in rhinoconjunctivitis. Clin Exp Allergy 1991;21:7783.
  • 9
    Juniper EF, Thompson AK, Ferrie PJ, Roberts JN. Validation of the standardized version of the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1999;104:364369.
  • 10
    Bousquet J, Bullinger M, Fayol C, Marquis P, Valentin B, Burtin B. Assessment of quality of life in patients with perennial allergic rhinitis with the French version of the SF-36 Health Status Questionnaire. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1994;94:182188.
  • 11
    Bousquet PJ, Combescure C, Neukirch F, Klossek JM, Mechin H, Daures JP et al. Visual analog scales can assess the severity of rhinitis graded according to ARIA guidelines. Allergy 2007;62:367372.
  • 12
    Leong KP, Yeak SC, Saurajen AS, Mok PK, Earnest A, Siow JK et al. Why generic and disease-specific quality-of-life instruments should be used together for the evaluation of patients with persistent allergic rhinitis. Clin Exp Allergy 2005;35:288298.
  • 13
    Terreehorst I, Duivenvoorden HJ, Tempels-Pavlica Z, Oosting AJ, De Monchy JG, Bruijnzeel-Koomen CA et al. Comparison of a generic and a rhinitis-specific quality-of-life (QOL) instrument in patients with house dust mite allergy: relationship between the SF-36 and Rhinitis QOL Questionnaire. Clin Exp Allergy 2004;34:16731677.
  • 14
    Juniper EF, Thompson AK, Roberts JN. Can the standard gamble and rating scale be used to measure quality of life in rhinoconjunctivitis? Comparison with the RQLQ and SF-36 Allergy 2002;57:201206.
  • 15
    Sintonen H. The 15D instrument of health-related quality of life: properties and applications. Ann Med 2001;33:328336.
  • 16
    Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O’Brien B, Stoeckmann E. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes, 3rd edn. Oxford: Medical Publications, 2005.
  • 17
    Graham DM, Blaiss MS. Quality-of-life outcomes measures of asthma and allergic rhinitis. Pediatr Ann 2000;29:438443.
  • 18
    Brazier J. The SF-36 health survey questionnaire – a tool for economists. Health Econ 1993;2:213215.
  • 19
    The EuroQol Group. EuroQol – a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990;16:199208.
  • 20
    Crown WH, Olufade A, Smith MW, Nathan R. Seasonal versus perennial allergic rhinitis: drug and medical resource use patterns. Value Health 2003;6:448456.
  • 21
    Berggren F, Hjelmgren J, Lindgren B. Differences in health care utilisation and workdays lost between individuals with and without asthma. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2003;2:165170.
  • 22
    Serra-Batlles J, Plaza V, Morejon E, Comella A, Brugues J. Costs of asthma according to the degree of severity. Eur Respir J 1998;12:13221326.
  • 23
    Bachert C, Van Cauwenberge P. The WHO ARIA (allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma) initiative. Chem Immunol Allergy 2003;82:119126.
  • 24
    Bousquet J. Global initiative for asthma (GINA) and its objectives. Clin Exp Allergy 2000;30(Suppl. 1):25.
  • 25
    Bousquet J, Clark TJ, Hurd S, Khaltaev N, Lenfant C, O’byrne P et al. GINA guidelines on asthma and beyond. Allergy 2007;62:102112.
  • 26
    Sintonen H, Walker SR, Rosser R. Quality of life assessment. Key issues in the 1990s. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 1992.
  • 27
    Sintonen H. The 15-D measure of health related quality of life I: reliability, validity and sensitivity of its healthstate descriptive system. Melbourne: NCHPE, 1994. Report no. 41.
  • 28
    Sintonen H. The 15-D measure of health related quality of life II. Feasibility, reliability and validity of its valuation system. Melbourne: NCHPE, 1995. Report no. 42.
  • 29
    Wittrup-Jensen KU, Pedersen KM Modelling weights for 15D. Paper presented at the 22nd Nordic Study Group Meeting in Odense, 22–25 August. PhD Thesis; Faculty of Social Science, University of Southern Denmark, 2001.
  • 30
    Pedersen KM, Wittrup-Jensen K, Brooks R, Guidex C. Værdisætning af sundhed. Teorien om kvalitetsjusterede leveår og en dansk anvendelse (In Danish: valuation of health theory of quality adjusted life years). Odense: University of Southern Denmark, 2003.
  • 31
    Le CT, Boen JR. Health and number: basic biostatistical methods. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1995.
  • 32
    Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman & Hall, 1997.
  • 33
    Bousquet J, Lund VJ, Van CP, Bremard-Oury C, Mounedji N, Stevens MT et al. Implementation of guidelines for seasonal allergic rhinitis: a randomized controlled trial. Allergy 2003;58:733741.
  • 34
    Bachert C, Bousquet J, Canonica GW, Durham SR, Klimek L, Mullol J et al. Levocetirizine improves quality of life and reduces costs in long-term management of persistent allergic rhinitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2004;114:838844.

Appendix

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Methods
  4. Results
  5. Discussion
  6. Acknowledgments
  7. References
  8. Appendix
  9. Supporting Information

Appendix A

More information on the EQ-5D and 15D instruments is available from the following web sites (November 2007):

Supporting Information

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Methods
  4. Results
  5. Discussion
  6. Acknowledgments
  7. References
  8. Appendix
  9. Supporting Information

Appendix S1. Health economic analyses of treatment strategies for allergic respiratory tract illnesses (SABAL).

Please note: Blackwell Publishing are not responsible for the content or functionality of any supplementary materials supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing material) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.

FilenameFormatSizeDescription
ALL_1583_sm_Appendix S1.pdf939KSupporting info item

Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.