Table 3.
Mean Utility | 95 % CI | Min–max values | Source | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Yao et al. [12] and Aidelsburger et al. [13] | ||||
NYHA class I | 0.82 | (0.78:0.85) | [2] | |
NYHA class II | 0.72 | (0.69:0.75) | [2] | |
NYHA class III | 0.59 | (0.55:0.63) | [2] | |
NYHA class IV | 0.51 | (0.41:0.61) | [2] | |
Fox et al. [11] and Bond et al. [14] | ||||
NYHA class I | 0.93 | (0.91:0.96) | [8] | |
NYHA class II | 0.78 | (0.72:0.84) | [8] | |
NYHA class III | 0.61 | (0.59:0.63) | [27] | |
NYHA class IV | 0.44 | (0.42:0.46) | [27] | |
Bertoldi et al. [16] | ||||
NYHA class I | 0.90 | (0.71:0.94) | [28–30] | |
NYHA class II | 0.83 | (0.61:0.94) | [28–30] | |
NYHA class III | 0.74 | (0.52:0.84) | [28–30] | |
NYHA class IV | 0.60 | (0.42:0.74) | [28–30] | |
Callejo et al. [15] | ||||
NYHA class I | 0.69 | (0.53; 0.85) | [31] | |
NYHA class II | 0.60 | (0.46; 0.74) | [31] | |
NYHA class III | 0.49 | (0.34; 0.64) | [31] | |
NYHA class IV | 0.35 | (0.15; 0.55) | [31] | |
Neyt et al. [17]a | 0.78 | (0.73:0.83)b | [9] | |
Colquitt et al. [18] | ||||
NYHA class I | 0.86 | (0.85:0.86) | [29] | |
NYHA class II | 0.77 | (0.76:0.78) | [29] | |
NYHA class III | 0.67 | (0.73:0.77) | [29] | |
NYHA class IV | 0.53 | (0.48:0.58) |
aNeyt et al. [17] use only mean utility values for the overall sample
b97.5 % confidence interval