Valuing the EQ Health and Wellbeing Short Using Time Trade-Off and a Discrete Choice Experiment: A Feasibility Study

Evaluation of the Interdisciplinary Care Home-bAsed Reablement Program (I-CHARP) for People Living With Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in Care Homes

BACKGROUND

Major knowledge and practice gaps exist in aged care home services to support independence of older people with dementia. This research evaluates an adaptation of a community-based rehabilitation model for care homes, namely Interdisciplinary Care Home-bAsed Reablement Program (I-CHARP), by examining whether (and, if so, how) I-CHARP produces its intended effects and how this programme can be practicably implemented, sustained and scaled up across care homes in Australia.

METHODS

I-CHARP is a 4-month bio-behavioural-environmental rehabilitation model of care, integrated in care home services, supported through the deployment of an implementation strategy, the Research Enabled Aged Care Homes (REACH) network. It consists of (1) 8-12 full individual sessions and additional eight brief follow-ups per resident, tailored to the resident's needs, delivered primarily by a team of an occupational therapist, registered nurse and other allied health staff; (2) environmental modifications/assistive devices up to the value of $400 per resident; and (3) engagement of intervention care home staff, managers and regular visitors. An overarching evaluation approach is participatory action research using a cluster quasi-experimental design and mixed methods. It involves testing of the implementation strategy (REACH network and other approaches) while observing/gathering information on the intervention (I-CHARP) and related outcomes in three cycles. Participants include residents (aged ≥ 60 years with early stages of dementia) and care staff from 16 care homes. Care quality indicators, health care costs, field notes and semi-structured interviews/focus groups with intervention site staff, regular visitors and managers will provide further insights into I-CHARP processes and implementation issues.

DISCUSSION

In the final phase of the project, an Agile Implementation Playbook will be developed for the delivery of reablement care that can be used in routine practice across care homes in Australia. The study findings will also inform future policy development and strategic directions for dementia care in care homes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12623000885695 Registered 16 August 2023, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=386088.

PROTOCOL VERSION

1.0 dated 20 July 2023.

How well do participants understand the questions asked in the Online Personal Utility Functions (OPUF) approach? A cognitive debrief of the EQ-HWB-S (EQ Health and Wellbeing Short version) valuation

PURPOSE

Online elicitation of Personal Utility Functions (OPUF) is an innovative approach to valuing health states. OPUF uses a combination of ranking, swing-weighting, levels-rating and anchoring dead tasks. Little is known about how participants interpret and engage with OPUF tasks. This study aimed to address this gap.

METHOD

Cognitive debrief interviews, which included 'think-aloud' and probing questions, were undertaken in the UK to understand how members of the public engage with OPUF when used to value the EQ-HWB-S (EQ Health and Wellbeing Short version). Coding drew upon a Framework approach, with final codes including an assessment of how participants engaged with each of the five OPUF tasks based on whether (1) they completed as expected, (2) minor concerns were identified or (3) major concerns were identified. The presence of major concerns was judged to undermine the validity of responses.

RESULTS

All 27 interviews were identified to have at least minor concern and 18 (67%) were identified as having major concerns. Major concerns were identified in four of the tasks: ranking (in 19% of interviews), swing-weighting (30%), levels-rating (56%), anchoring dead task (48%). Older participants were more likely to have major errors.

CONCLUSION

Think-aloud and probing interviews with 27 participants completing the OPUF identified multiple concerns, to the extent that their data is unlikely to be a valid reflection of their preferences. The extent of concerns identified here suggests the need for interviewer led data collection within OPUF to ensure data quality.

Comparing the Measurement Properties of the Preliminary Version of the EuroQol Health and Well-Being and EQ-5D-5L in Patients, Healthy General Public, and Caregivers

OBJECTIVES

The EuroQol Health and Well-Being (EQ-HWB) is a new generic quality of life (QOL) questionnaire to capture broader aspects of health and well-being than EQ-5D-5L. This study examined the measurement properties of the preliminary EQ-HWB version in patients, healthy individuals, and healthy caregivers.

METHODS

Respondents (1) with or without caregiver tasks, (2) with different diseases, or (3) in full health were recruited online. Ceiling effects, convergent and divergent validity, known disease, and caregiver group differences were explored, and an exploratory factor analysis was used.

RESULTS

A total of 500 respondents were recruited, including 100 healthy individuals (excluding 40 healthy caregivers), 122 with chronic hepatitis B, 101 with HIV/AIDS, 107 with depression, and 90 with generalized anxiety disorder. The EQ-HWB activities dimension correlated most highly with the EQ-5D-5L mobility, self-care, and usual activities dimensions, whereas EQ-HWB physical sensation dimension was strongly related to the EQ-5D-5L pain/discomfort dimension. Additional EQ-HWB dimensions (self-identity, cognition, autonomy, feelings and emotions, and relationships) aligned most closely with the EQ-5D-5L anxiety/depression dimension. Both instruments differentiated disease burden across healthy individuals and patients and identified caregiving roles. The EQ-5D-5L revealed 3 factors in exploratory factor analysis, whereas the EQ-HWB included 2 additional factors (F1 cognition, F2 physical activity, F3 feelings and emotions, F4 positive items, and F5 physical sensation).

CONCLUSIONS

EQ-HWB is able to measure health-related QOL in healthy people, patients, and caregivers given that it shares the same conceptual structure with EQ-5D. EQ-HWB is more sensitive in patients with mental health conditions than the EQ-5D. These results support that EQ-HWB captures well-being alongside health-related QOL.

EQ-5D-5L or EQ-HWB-S: Which is the Better Instrument for Capturing Spillover Effects in Parental Carers of Children with COVID-19?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

'Caregiver health spillovers' refer to the broader impacts of an individual's illness and interventions on informal caregivers' health and well-being. This study focuses on the spillover effects experienced by parental carers of children with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), aiming to compare the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L and the experimental EQ Health and Wellbeing Short version (EQ-HWB-S) in capturing these effects.

METHODS

A longitudinal study was conducted with 861 parental carers of children aged 0-18 years with COVID-19 and 231 parents of healthy children as the control group. The EQ-5D-5L and EQ-HWB-S were used to assess parental health and well-being. Analyses included known-groups validity (multivariable regression), test-retest reliability (Gwet's AC1, intraclass correlation coefficient) and responsiveness to health improvement (Glass' Δ effect size).

RESULTS

Parents of infected children reported more problems than those of healthy controls. The EQ-HWB-S better discriminated between sub-groups defined by the child's COVID-19 presence, caring time and work impact. Test-retest reliability was fair to good for EQ-HWB-S dimensions (Gwet's AC1: 0.33-0.79), moderate to good for EQ-5D-5L (Gwet's AC1: 0.40-0.76), and good for index scores and EQ VAS (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.70-0.77). Parental health and well-being improved as children recovered, with the EQ-5D-5L showing slightly higher responsiveness (effect size: 0.77-0.87) than EQ-HWB-S (effect size: 0.62-0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

Both EQ-HWB-S and EQ-5D-5L are valid, reliable and responsive for measuring parental spillover effects related to a child's COVID-19 infection. EQ-HWB-S outperformed in distinguishing social and emotional impacts of caregiving, while EQ-5D-5L better captured physical health improvements. The choice between tools may depend on study objectives.

Estimating a preference-based index for patients with myasthenia gravis from the MGQoL-6D measure

OBJECTIVE

Myasthenia gravis is a chronic neuromuscular disease that causes weakness. It's uncertain whether generic health instruments can adequately capture its impact. This study aimed to develop a scoring system to generate utility values for all health states defined by the myasthenia gravis quality of life 6-dimension (MGQoL-6D) classification in Chinese patients with myasthenia gravis (MG).

METHODS

The data used in this study were obtained from a web-based cross-sectional study conducted in China. Patients with MG were invited to complete an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey. Each participant completed 10 randomly assigned choice pairs from a set of 40 choice pairs, with each pair comprising two health states and a duration attribute. Conditional logistic regression analysis was employed to analyse the data, which included responses from 300 patients.

RESULTS

Utility decrements estimated by conditional logit regression were generally monotonic, with the largest decrements observed for emotion (- 0.419), social activity (- 0.323), and hobbies and fun activities (- 0.323). The MGQoL-6D utility scores ranged between - 0.559 and 1.

CONCLUSION

This study established utility weights for the MGQoL-6D that can facilitate cost-utility analyses related to MG-related health interventions and technologies.

Delineating Care Recipient Burden Constructs: Development and Validation of the CARE-2B Scale for Care Recipient Self-Perceived Burden and Proxy Assessment of Caregiver Burden

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Care Recipient Self-Perceived Burden (CR-SPB) to Caregivers is an important but overlooked aspect within the caregiver-care recipient relationship. This study aimed to (a) develop and validate the CARE-2B (Care Recipient's Two Burden) Scale, assessing both CR-SPB and their proxy assessment of caregiver burden (Proxy-CB); and (b) examine whether the CR-SPB and Proxy-CB differ from caregiver burden's own assessment and other health and social care constructs.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Data were collected from 504 caregiver-care recipient dyads in the United States using an online panel between August 2022 and February 2023. Care recipients completed the CARE-2B Scale, which includes two subscales: CR-SPB and Proxy-CB. Care recipients also completed measures related to health and well-being: SPB-scale, EQ-5D-5L, and EQ Health and Well-Being (EQ-HWB). Caregivers completed Care-Related Quality of Life (CarerQoL) and Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers (ASCOT-Carer). Psychometric analysis included exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, item response theory (IRT), and construct validity.

RESULTS

CR-SPB correlated strongly with the SPB-scale (r = 0.73), whereas Proxy-CB correlated more strongly with caregiver-reported burden (r = 0.61). Both CR-SPB and Proxy-CB items demonstrated good discrimination and information coverage in IRT analysis. Exploratory factor analysis further supported the distinctiveness of CR-SPB and Proxy-CB, with CR-SPB items loading on a separate factor from caregiver burden and health constructs, whereas Proxy-CB aligned with caregiver-reported burden.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

The CARE-2B Scale innovatively assesses both CR-SPB and Proxy-CB from the care recipient's perspective, providing new insights into the caregiving relationship. This dual-perspective measure has implications for enhancing care strategies for individuals with chronic conditions or disabilities and their caregivers.

The Psychometric Properties of the EQ-HWB and EQ-HWB-S in Patients With Breast Cancer: A Comparative Analysis With EQ-5D-5L, FACT-8D, and SWEMWBS

OBJECTIVES

The EQ Health and Wellbeing (EQ-HWB) is a new generic measure that captures constructs beyond health-related quality of life, with a 25-item long form and a shorter 9-item version (EQ-HWB-S). This study aimed to assess the psychometric performance of both versions in breast cancer, which is the most prevalent cancer worldwide, and compare them with other instruments.

METHODS

A longitudinal survey in Indonesia (2023-2024) with 300 female patients used the EQ-HWB, 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (from which Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Eight Dimension [FACT-8D] was derived), and Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS, from which the Short WEMWBS was derived). Distributional characteristics, convergent validity, known-group validity (Student's t test or analysis of variance), test-retest reliability, and responsiveness were assessed.

RESULTS

All patients reported problems in at least 1 EQ-HWB item. The EQ-HWB-S index (11%) had a lower ceiling than the EQ-5D-5L (35%) and the Short WEMWBS (15.3%), but not the FACT-8D (5%). EQ-HWB-S index values correlated strongly with EQ-5D-5L (r = 0.73) and FACT-8D index values (r = 0.70), whereas EQ-HWB level sum scores correlated strongly with Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (r = 0.69) and moderately with WEMWBS (r = 0.49). The EQ-HWB and EQ-HWB-S discriminated across known groups comparably with the EQ-5D-5L and FACT-8D with large effect sizes according to EuroQol visual analog scale groups, number of symptoms, and general health and exhibited excellent instrument-level test-retest reliability (intraclass correlations, 0.79-0.83) and acceptable responsiveness (standardized response means, |0.24| to |0.97|).

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents one of the first validations of the EQ-HWB and EQ-HWB-S in any clinical population. Both instrument versions demonstrate robust psychometric performance. The EQ-HWB-S can be recommended to inform resource allocation decisions of breast cancer treatments.

Associations between financial toxicity, health-related quality of life, and well-being in Indonesian patients with breast cancer

OBJECTIVES

Financial toxicity (FT) is the impairment of financial well-being experienced by patients with cancer, categorized into subjective (SFT) and objective (OFT) forms. This study aimed to investigate the associations between FT, health-related quality of life, and overall well-being in patients with breast cancer.

METHODS

We analyzed baseline data from a single-center longitudinal study in Indonesia. Patients completed the EQ-5D-5L, EQ Health and Wellbeing (EQ-HWB), COST: A FACIT Measure of Financial Toxicity (FACIT-COST, for measuring SFT), and OFT-related questions. Ordinal logistic regression was used to examine the associations between FT and selected EQ-5D-5L and EQ-HWB items. Multivariable linear regression was used to assess the associations of FT and EQ-5D-5L and EQ-HWB-S index values. The main regression models were adjusted for socio-demographic and clinical factors such as age, income, metastasis status, and symptoms.

RESULTS

The survey included 300 female patients with breast cancer undergoing treatment (mean age = 51). Overall, 21% experienced high SFT (FACIT-COST ≤ 17.5) and 51% reported any OFT (e.g., incurring debt). Adjusted for covariates, higher SFT was associated with more problems in EQ-5D-5L pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression, and in EQ-HWB exhaustion, anxiety, sadness/depression, frustration, pain, and discomfort. OFT was associated with more problems in exhaustion. Higher SFT was associated with lower EQ-5D-5L and EQ-HWB-S index values, with explained variances of 46.3% for EQ-HWB-S and 31.2% for EQ-5D-5L.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to explore the associations between financial toxicity, EQ-5D-5L, and EQ-HWB outcomes in breast cancer. Our findings provide insight into the cancer burden and its link to health and well-being.

The performance of the EQ-HWB-S as a measure of quality-of-life of caregivers in families that have experienced adverse events

PURPOSE

The recently developed EQ Health and Wellbeing Instrument (EQ-HWB) is a broad, generic measure of quality-of-life designed to be suitable for caregivers. The aim of this study was to investigate performance and validity of the 9-item version (EQ-HWB-S) for caregivers where families had experienced adverse-life-events.

METHODS

Using survey data from caregivers of children aged 0-8 years attending a community-health centre in 2021-2022, the general performance, feasibility, convergent and known-group validity, responsiveness-to-change, and test-retest reliability of the EQ-HWB-S was assessed. Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted with survey respondents to assess acceptability and content validity.

RESULTS

The sample included  234 caregivers at baseline (81% female, mean age 36-years, 38% Australian-born) and 190 at 6-months follow-up. Most EQ-HWB-S item responses were evenly spread, except for 'Mobility'. The instrument showed good convergent validity with psychological distress (Kessler 6 (K6)) and personal-wellbeing (PWI-A) scales. EQ-HWB-S level sum-scores and preference-weighted scores were significantly different in all known-group analyses, in expected directions, and the instrument was responsive to change. For test-retest reliability, Intraclass Correlation Coefficients were excellent and individual item Kappa scores were moderate. The instrument was well received by interviewees who found the questions clear and relevant. The items were appropriate for parents experiencing adversity and carers of children with additional needs.

CONCLUSION

The EQ-HWB-S appeared valid, responsive to change, feasible, and well accepted by caregivers. By demonstrating the validity of the EQ-HWB-S in this hard-to-reach population of caregivers in families experiencing adverse events, this study adds to existing international evidence supporting its use.

Exploring Social Preferences for Health and Well-Being Across the Digital Divide: A Qualitative Investigation Based on Tasks Taken From an Online Discrete Choice Experiment

OBJECTIVES

Increasingly, discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are conducted online, with little consideration of the digitally excluded, who are unable to participate. Policy makers or others considering online research data need clarity about how views might differ across this "digital divide." We took tasks from an existing online DCE designed to elicit social preferences for health and well-being outcomes. We aimed to explore (1) how telephone interview participants answered a series of choice tasks taken from an online DCE and (2) whether and how decision making for these tasks differed between digitally excluded and nonexcluded participants.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured telephone interviews with members of the public (n = 27), recruited via an existing social research panel. Data were analyzed thematically to identify key approaches to decision making.

RESULTS

Twelve participants were classed as "digitally excluded," and 15 as "digitally nonexcluded." Responses were similar between the 2 samples for most choice tasks. We identified 3 approaches used to reach decisions: (1) simplifying, (2) creating explanatory narratives, and (3) personalizing. Although these approaches were common across both samples, understanding the exercise seemed more challenging for the digitally excluded sample.

CONCLUSIONS

This novel study provides some assurance that the participants' views over the choice tasks used are similar across the digital divide. The challenges we identified with understanding highlight the need to carefully examine the views held by the digitally excluded. If online data are to inform policy making, it is essential to explore the views of those who cannot participate in online DCEs.

Appropriateness of the EQ-HWB for Use in Residential Aged Care: A Proxy Perspective

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The EQ Health and Wellbeing (EQ-HWB) is a new generic quality-of-life measure for use in evaluating interventions in health, public health and social care. This study aimed to explore proxies' views regarding the appropriateness of the EQ-HWB for measuring residents' quality of life living in residential aged care facilities.

METHODS

Qualitative think-aloud and semi-structured interviews were conducted with family members and aged care staff across three facilities in Melbourne, Australia. Proxies completed the 25-item EQ-HWB proxy version 2 (i.e. proxy-person perspective) whilst talking through the reasons for choosing their response. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

The sample included 29 proxies; nine family members and 20 aged care staff. The first theme summarised proxies' ability to proxy report residents' health and well-being using the EQ-HWB, which highlighted challenges with adherence to the proxy perspective, proxies' limited knowledge about residents, disagreement with residents' self-evaluation and use of heuristics. The second theme reflected feedback on the suitability of the EQ-HWB for use in residential aged care. Although proxies perceived that the EQ-HWB covered important domains, there were concerns about ambiguity, inappropriate examples, double-barrelled items and perceived repetition. Suggestions were made to improve the response options, comprehensiveness, recall period, layout and instructions of the questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

While the EQ-HWB captures domains relevant to residential aged care, modifications to item wording and examples are necessary to improve its appropriateness. Use of the proxy-person perspective revealed some challenges that require further consideration.

Psychometric Performance of the EQ Health and Wellbeing Short in a United Kingdom Population Sample

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the psychometric performance and construct validity of the EQ Health and Wellbeing Short (EQ-HWB-S), using a validated measure, the EQ-5D-5L, as a comparator.

METHODS

The experimental version of the EQ-HWB-S was compared with the EQ-5D-5L to assess the psychometric performance of the measures. Data were drawn from the valuation stages of the Extending the Quality-Adjusted Life-Year project (UK general population, n = 429) and the EQ-5D-5L UK valuation pilot study (UK general population, n = 248). Construct validity was assessed based on convergent validity, using Spearman correlations and Pearson correlations. Known-group validity was assessed by estimating effect sizes to assess the ability of the EQ-HWB-S and EQ-5D-5L to discriminate between known groups based on "healthy" status, presence of a long-term condition, health and life satisfaction, age, and employment status. The degree of agreement in utility values across instruments was also evaluated using Bland-Altman plots.

RESULTS

Strong associations (rs ≥ 0.5, P < .001) were found between conceptually overlapping dimensions and the utility scores of the EQ-HWB-S and EQ-5D-5L. The instruments performed comparably in discriminating between known groups including healthy versus unhealthy groups (based on the visual analog scale ≥ 80), long-term condition (vs no long-term condition), and above versus below average health and life satisfaction and employed (vs unemployed and long-term sick).

CONCLUSIONS

The EQ-HWB-S performs favorably with utility values successfully discriminating between groups in which differences are expected. Convergence between the EQ-HWB-S and EQ-5D-5L is evident, especially between conceptually overlapping dimensions.

A Head-to-Head Comparison of EQ-HWB and EQ-5D-5L in Patients, Carers, and General Public in China

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to understand the psychometric properties of EQ Health and Wellbeing (EQ-HWB) and to examine its relationship with EQ-5D-5L in a sample covering patients, carers, and general public.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted in Guizhou Province, China. The acceptability, convergent validity (using Spearman correlation coefficients), internal structure (using exploratory factor analysis), and known-group validity of EQ-HWB, EQ-HWB-Short (EQ-HWB-S), and EQ-5D-5L were reported and compared.

RESULTS

A total of 323 participants completed the survey, including 106 patients, 101 carers, and 116 individuals from the general public. Approximately 7.4% of participants had at least 1 missing response. In the EQ-HWB and EQ-5D-5L items related to activities, there were more level 1 responses. The correlations between EQ-HWB and EQ-5D-5L items ranged from low to high, confirming the convergent validity of similar aspects between the 2 instruments. Notably, EQ-HWB measures 2 additional factors compared with EQ-5D-5L or EQ-HWB-S, both of which share 3 common factors. When the patient group was included, EQ-5D-5L had the largest effect size, but it failed to differentiate between the groups of general public and carers. Both EQ-HWB and EQ-HWB-S demonstrated better known-group validity results when carers were included.

CONCLUSIONS

EQ-HWB measures a broader quality of life construct that goes beyond health measured by EQ-5D-5L. By encompassing a broader scope, the impact of healthcare interventions may become diluted, given that other factors can influence well-being outcomes as significantly as health conditions do.

Comparison of the EQ-HWB and EQ-HWB-S With Other Preference-Based Measures Among United States Informal Caregivers

OBJECTIVES

Several measures have been used or developed to capture the health and well-being of caregivers, including the EQ Health and Well-being (EQ-HWB) and its short form, EQ-HWB-S. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties and construct validity of the EQ-HWB/EQ-HWB-S in a US caregiver population.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted involving 504 caregivers. Eligible participants were 18+ years old, provided unpaid care to a relative/friend aged 18+ in the past 6 months, and spent on average of at least 1 hour per week caregiving. Survey included the following measures: EQ-HWB, Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers-Carer, CarerQol, and EQ-5D-5L. Psychometric properties were assessed using response distributions, floor/ceiling effects, Spearman's correlation for convergent validity, and effect sizes (ES) for known-group validity based on caregiving situations and intensity.

RESULTS

The average age of caregivers was 49.2 (SD = 15.4), with 57.5% being female. More than half (54.4%) reported high caregiving intensity, and 68.3% lived with the care recipient. The EQ-HWB-S index showed a strong positive correlation with the EQ-5D-5L (rs = 0.72), Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers (rs = 0.54), and CarerQol (rs = 0.54) indices. Notably, the EQ-HWB-S index showed the largest ES among measures in differentiating caregiving scenarios with a large ES for caregiver's general health (d = 1.00) and small ES for caregiving intensity (d = 0.39).

CONCLUSIONS

Results support construct validity of EQ-HWB and EQ-HWB-S as measures for assessing health and well-being of adult informal caregivers in comparison with other validated instruments. Differing levels of known-group validity across anchors emphasize the importance of selecting appropriate measures for caregivers, depending on research question and/or intervention aims.

The Measurement Properties of the EQ-HWB and the EQ-HWB-S in Italian Population: A Comparative Study With EQ-5D-5L

OBJECTIVES

The EQ Health and Well-being, EQ-HWB (25-item) and the EQ-HWB-S (9-item), are new generic measures of health and well-being. The purpose of this study was to examine the measurement properties of the EQ-HWB and EQ-HWB-S measures in relation to the EQ-5D-5L among the Italian general population.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted from October 2020 to February 2021, followed by secondary analysis of collected data from Italian adults. This analysis included response pattern distributions, correlation strength, and known-group comparison. Known-group comparison was assessed using effect sizes (ES) across health conditions, caregiver status, and social care usage. The EQ-HWB-S index-based score was based on the UK pilot value set, whereas the Italian value set was used for scoring the EQ-5D-5L index.

RESULTS

Out of the 1182 participants, 461 reported having a chronic condition, 185 identified as caregivers, and 42 were social care users. EQ-HWB items (7.5%) showed fewer ceiling effects than EQ-5D-5L items (34.7%). Strong correlations (rs > 0.5) were found between overlapping EQ-HWB and EQ-5D-5L items. EQ-HWB-S and EQ-5D-5L index scores demonstrated similar discrimination based on symptomatic chronic conditions (ES d = 0.68 vs d = 0.71), but EQ-HWB-S had slightly higher ES for social care users (ES d = 0.84 vs d = 0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

Initial evidence supports the validity of EQ-HWB/EQ-HWB-S because outcome measures in the Italian population. EQ-HWB-S performed comparably to EQ-5D-5L among patients and was better in differentiating social care users. A slight decrease in discriminative properties for caregivers was observed when transitioning from EQ-HWB to EQ-HWB-S.

Understanding caregiver burden from multiple perspectives: dyadic agreement between caregiver and care recipient

PURPOSE

Caregiver burden (CB) is typically self-assessed by caregivers. However, an emerging concept is assessment of CB by the recipients of care, i.e., the patient. The specific objectives are (1) to assess the level of agreement between care recipients' and caregivers' view on CB, across financial, physical, emotional, and social domains; (2) to explore two care recipient perspectives: their self-perceived burden (CR-SPB), and their interpretation of the caregiver's view (Proxy-CB).

METHODS

Data were collected from 504 caregiver-care recipient dyads in the U.S. using an online Qualtrics panel. The survey assessed caregiver burden using CarerQol and newly developed items. The level of agreement between responses was quantified using weighted kappa (κ) coefficients for individual items and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for index/summary scores.

RESULTS

The average age of caregivers was 49.2 years, and 62.7 years for care recipients. Dyads most commonly consisted of spouses/partners (34.5%); 68.3% lived together. Proxy-CB aligned more closely with caregiver's view, with moderate to substantial agreement across CB domains (from κ = 0.48 for emotional to κ = 0.66 for financial). In the same perspective, the CarerQol-7D Index showed moderate agreement (ICC = 0.58) and the summary score of CB items substantial agreement (ICC = 0.76). Care recipients generally overestimated  CB in the Proxy-CB perspective, while they underestimated it in the CR-SPB perspective.

CONCLUSION

Results demonstrate there is a difference between perspectives. Strong agreement in Proxy-CB perspective suggests that care recipients can potentially substitute for caregivers depending on the domain. CR-SPB agrees less with caregivers and may provide complementary information.

The Validity of the EuroQol Health and Wellbeing Short Version (EQ-HWB-S) Instrument in Parents of Children With and Without Health Conditions

BACKGROUND

 The EuroQol Health and Wellbeing Short Version (EQ-HWB-S) instrument has been developed to measure the health and wellbeing of care-recipients and their caregivers for use in economic evaluation.The EQ-HWB-S has nine items, and pilot UK preference weights have now been developed.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the validity of the instrument in parents of children with and without health conditions.

METHODS

EQ-HWB-S data were sourced from an Australian paediatric multi-instrument comparison study. We analysed the baseline characteristics and response distribution of the EQ-HWB-S items. Assessment of known-group validity was conducted for EQ-HWB-S items, level sum-scores and preference-weighted scores, including partial effects. Known-group analyses included three child health variables and where caregivers reported coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had impacted their wellbeing. We included analyses across gender, controlled for child and parent demographic variables, and compared scores across child health conditions.

RESULTS

 Item responses were distributed as expected, with higher skew for mobility and activities. Parents experienced high levels of exhaustion. We detected significant differences between groups for level sum-scores and preference-weighted scores, as hypothesised; all tests were significant (p < 0.001), with moderate effect sizes (effect sizes were slightly higher for female than male parents). The regression analysis identified significantly different EQ-HWB-S scores for child health samples compared with the general population after controlling for demographic variables. Differences were observed between child health conditions.

CONCLUSION

The EQ-HWB-S is a useful instrument to measure parent quality of life for economic evaluation in this population. Data were limited to one time point; further research should investigate the instrument's sensitivity to change and test-retest reliability in this population.

Scoring the EQ-HWB-S: can we do it without value sets? A non-parametric item response theory analysis

BACKGROUND

Only one pilot value set (UK) is currently available for the EQ Health and Wellbeing Instrument short version (EQ-HWB-S). As an alternative to preference-weighted scoring, we examined whether a level summary score (LSS) is appropriate for the EQ-HWB-S using Mokken scaling analyses.

METHODS

Data from patients, carers and the general population collected during the developmental phase of the EQ-HWB-S in Australia, US and UK were used, noting 3 of 9 items have since undergone revision. EQ-HWB-S data fit was examined using R package Mokken scaling's monotone homogeneity model, utilizing the automated item selection procedure (AISP) as well as Loevinger's scaling coefficients for items and the scale (HS). Manifest monotonicity was assessed by examining whether the cumulative probability for responses at or above each response level did not decrease across the summary score.

RESULTS

EQ-HWB-S data were available for 3340 respondents: US = 903, Australia = 514 and UK = 1923. Mean age was 50 ± 18 and 1841 (55%) were female. AISP placed all 9 items of the EQ-HWB-S on a single scale when the lower bound was set to < 0.448. Strong scalability (HS = 0.561) was found for the EQ-HWB-S as a single scale. Stronger scales were formed by separating the psychosocial items (n = 6, HS = 0.683) and physical sensation items (n = 3, HS = 0.713). No violations of monotonicity were found except for the items mobility and daily activities for the subgroups with long-term conditions and UK subjects, respectively.

DISCUSSION

As EQ-HWB-S items formed a strong scale and subscales based on Mokken analysis, LSS is a promising weighting-free approach to scoring.

Exploring the Comparability Between EQ-5D and the EQ Health and Wellbeing in the General Australian Population

OBJECTIVES

The EQ Health and Wellbeing (EQ-HWB) is a novel measure that conceptually overlaps with the 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) while capturing broader dimensions of health and well-being. This study aimed to explore the extent to which the EQ-HWB and EQ-5D-5L capture overlapping or complementary constructs and to explore the discriminative ability of the EQ-HWB Short version (EQ-HWB-S) as a multiattribute utility instrument in the Australian setting.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of data from a nationally representative cross-sectional survey of 2002 Australian adults was performed. The survey included socioeconomic questions and health characteristics and the EQ-HWB and EQ-5D-5L instruments. Convergent and known-group validity were evaluated through Spearman rank correlation and multivariable regression analyses, respectively. An exploratory factor analysis was also performed to explore the underlying constructs of the 2 measures.

RESULTS

Correlation coefficients varied from moderate to strong (rs ≥ 0.40) between the EQ-5D-5L and the corresponding EQ-HWB dimensions (all P < .001). Based on the exploratory factor analysis, both instruments measure similar underlying constructs, with the EQ-HWB capturing broader aspects of well-being. The known-group analysis demonstrated the relative discriminative ability of the EQ-HWB-S in capturing broader aspects of health and well-being.

CONCLUSIONS

The EQ-HWB was at least moderately correlated with the EQ-5D-5L in overlapping domains/dimensions and demonstrated greater sensitivity in participants with mental health problems versus the EQ-5D-5L. Our findings support future research exploring the value of the EQ-HWB-S as a multiattribute utility instrument for the general Australian population.

Face Validity of Four Preference-Weighted Quality-of-Life Measures in Residential Aged Care: A Think-Aloud Study

OBJECTIVE

There is an increased use of preference-weighted quality-of-life measures in residential aged care to guide resource allocation decisions or for quality-of-care assessments. However, little is known about their face validity (i.e., how understandable, appropriate and relevant the measures are 'on their face' when respondents complete them). The aim of this study was to assess the face validity of four preference-weighted measures (i.e., EQ-5D-5L, EQ-HWB, ASCOT, QOL-ACC) in older people living in residential aged care.

METHODS

Qualitative cognitive think-aloud interviews were conducted using both concurrent and retrospective think-aloud techniques. To reduce burden, each resident completed two measures, with the four measures randomised across participants. Audio recordings were transcribed and framework analysis was used for data analysis, based on an existing framework derived from the Tourangeau four-stage response model.

RESULTS

In total, 24 interviews were conducted with residents living across three residential aged care facilities in Melbourne, Australia. Response issues were identified across all four measures, often related to comprehension and difficulty selecting a response level due to double-barrelled and ambiguous items that have different meanings in the residential aged care context. We also identified issues related to understanding instructions, non-adherence to the recall period, and noted positive responding that requires attention when interpreting the data.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide further evidence on the appropriateness of existing measures, indicating numerous response issues that require further research to guide the selection process for research and practice.

Re-revisiting the Utilities of Health States Worse than Dead: The Problem Remains

BACKGROUND

In valuation studies of the EQ-5D-5L instrument, the composite time tradeoff method (cTTO) is often used to elicit preferences. In cTTO, some health states are considered worse than dead (WTD) and are assigned negative utility values. However, these negative values correlate poorly with state severity, which suggests that cTTO is insufficiently sensitive. A recent threshold explanation has been offered to account for the lack of correlation: because the severity threshold beyond which a state is considered WTD differs between respondents, the correlation should be studied for individual respondents clustered by the number of WTD states. The results obtained in such a threshold approach were interpreted to disprove the insensitivity of the cTTO method.

AIM

To scrutinize the threshold explanation and test whether it indeed refutes the insensitivity of cTTO.

METHODS

The study uses data from the EQ-5D-5L Polish valuation study, which includes cTTO responses from 1,510 participants, each of whom evaluated 10 EQ-5D-5L states. The correlation analysis and threshold approach are repeated to confirm the results from previous studies. The data are then modified in 2 contrasting ways. First, negative utilities are randomly reshuffled to test whether the threshold approach can capture cTTO insensitivity. Second, individual-level regressions are used to simulate negative values to ensure they correlate with severity at the individual respondent level, verifying whether the overall severity-utility correlation should be observed.

RESULTS

First, reshuffling negative utilities does not change the results of the threshold approach. Hence, the threshold explanation fails to prove cTTO sensitivity. Second, when sensitivity was introduced on an individual level, a significant overall correlation between severity and negative utility arose.

CONCLUSION

cTTO is insensitive to severity for WTD states.

HIGHLIGHTS

For the composite time tradeoff method, the utility values of health states worse than dead correlate poorly with state severity, which suggests that cTTO has insufficient sensitivity.Recently, a so-called threshold explanation was offered for the lack of correlation.I show why the threshold explanation fails and why the composite time tradeoff is indeed insensitive for worse-than-dead states.