Utility Scores In Patients With Oxygen-Dependent COPD: A Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Utility measures that summarize the health-related quality of life of an individual using a single number usually between 0 (death) and 1 (full health) are useful to quantify the benefits of health care interventions in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and to help prioritizing limited health resources from cost-effectiveness analyses among patients with different health conditions. OBJECTIVE: To determine utility scores in patients with oxygen-dependent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: Patients with oxygen-dependent COPD (the cases) were matched, on a 1:2 basis, to COPD controls according to gender, age (± 5 years) and FEV1 (±5% predicted). Utility scores were obtained from the SF-6D, a measure derived from the SF-36. RESULTS: From a cohort of 102 patients with oxygen-dependent COPD, 68 (42 men; mean age: 71 years; mean FEV1: 35% predicted) were successfully matched with 136 controls. We found clinically and statistically significant differences in mean utility scores between cases (0.588 ± 0.071) and controls (0.627 ± 0.085; p = 0.001). The same differences were observed in men and women. CONCLUSION: Oxygen-dependence adds to the burden of disease in terms of quality of life. These utility scores may be useful in cost-utility analyses involving patients with oxygen-dependent COPD.

Randomized trial of a smoking cessation intervention in hospitalized patients.

A hospitalization is a time when perceived vulnerability to dangers from smoking and quitting motivation may be at their peak. Aim was to determine whether a smoking cessation intervention of moderate intensity would increase the smoking cessation rate in hospitalized smokers. Design was randomized trial, conducted in a university-affiliated cardio-pulmonary tertiary care center. Participants were hospitalized smokers aged < or =70 years. Intervention was a smoking cessation intervention consisting of education and psychological support, with or without pharmacological therapy, associated with follow-up phone calls. Patients assigned to the control group received usual care. Measurement was point prevalence cessation rate at 1-year follow-up. A total of 468 patients were screened; 196 were randomized. Although the smoking cessation rates at 12-month follow-up were higher than expected, we found no significant difference between the study groups (intervention: 30.3%; control: 27.8%). Similar results were obtained in patients whose smoking status was validated by urinary cotinine assay. Length of stay and dependence to nicotine were the only significant predictors of smoking cessation. A smoking cessation intervention of moderate intensity delivered in a tertiary cardio-pulmonary center did not increase the smoking cessation rate at 1-year follow-up. The results of this trial should not divert those who deliver care to inpatients from delivering a brief smoking cessation intervention.