What Determines the Shape of an EQ-5D Index Distribution?

Validation of the Hungarian version of the General Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) in clinical and general populations

BACKGROUND

COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) provides a framework for selecting and validating patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs). This study aims to validate the Hungarian version of the GOHAI and, for the first time, to assess its Standard Error of Measurement (SEM), Smallest Detectable Change (SDC), and Measurement Invariance (MI) across general and clinical populations as well as different age groups, following COSMIN guidelines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The translation was performed using a forward-backward process. A mixed sample (n = 306) was recruited in Budapest from May 2023 to February 2024, consisting of the general population (45.1%), recruited from health kiosks and a nursing home, and the clinical population (54.9%), sourced from Semmelweis University's care units. The sample was further divided into two age groups: 18-64 years old (54.9%) and 65 + years old (45.1%). GOHAI was administered twice to 108 stable participants. For both the additive score (ADD-GOHAI) and simple count (SC-GOHAI), structural validity and measurement invariance by subgroups were assessed via Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha, and test-retest reliability was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). SEM was calculated using the SEM agreement formula, and SDC using: [Formula: see text]. Convergent and known-group validity were tested against predefined hypotheses for structural validity.

RESULTS

Contrary to a three factor model, a single-factor model showed good fit in all subgroups for both scoring methods, with adequate internal consistency (Cronbach 𝛼: 0.76-0.85). Four of the six hypotheses for convergent validity and all ten hypotheses for known-groups validity supported the predefined criteria. Measurement invariance between clinical and general populations, or by age, was not demonstrated, so GOHAI's different measurement properties should be considered when comparing subpopulations. Test-retest reliability was adequate (ICC: 0.87-0.96). SDC was ≈5 points using ADD-GOHAI and 2-3 points using SC-GOHAI.

CONCLUSION

The Hungarian version of GOHAI demonstrates satisfactory psychometric properties across both general and clinical populations, as well as among both younger and older age groups. While the measurement properties of SC-GOHAI may be more stable between populations, ADD-GOHAI seems more suitable for individual follow-up. However, observed changes must be considered in relation to the measurement error associated with GOHAI.

Use of EQ-5D-5L for Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes in a National Register for Specialized Rehabilitation

OBJECTIVE

To compare problems reported on EQ-5D-5L dimensions, index, and EQ visual analog scale (VAS) scores in patients receiving specialized rehabilitation in Norway with general population norms.

DESIGN

Multicenter observational study.

SETTING

Five specialist rehabilitation facilities participating in a national rehabilitation register between March 11, 2020, and April 20, 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

1167 inpatients admitted (N=1167), with a mean age of 56.1 (range, 18-91) years; 43% were female.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

EQ-5D-5L dimension, index, and EQ VAS scores.

RESULTS

At admission, mean±SD EQ-5D-5L index scores were 0.48 (0.31) compared to 0.82 (0.19) for general population norms. EQ VAS scores were 51.29 (20.74) compared to 79.46 (17.53) for population norms. Together with those for the 5 dimensions, these differences were all statistically significant (P<.01). Compared to population norms, patients undergoing rehabilitation had more health states as assessed by the 5 dimensions (550 vs 156) and EQ VAS (98 vs 49). As hypothesized, EQ-5D-5L scores were associated with number of diagnoses, admission to/from secondary care, and help with completion. At discharge there were statistically significant improvements in all EQ-5D-5L scores that compare favorably with available estimates for minimal important differences.

CONCLUSIONS

The large deviations in scores at admission and score changes at discharge lend support to EQ-5D-5L application in national quality measurement. Evidence for construct validity was found through associations with number of secondary diagnoses and help with completion.

Treatment burden and health-related quality of life of patients with multimorbidity: a cross-sectional study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate treatment burden and its relationship with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among patients with multimorbidity (two or more chronic diseases) who were taking prescription medications and attending the outpatient department of the University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Teaching Hospital.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted between March 2019 and July 2019. Treatment burden was measured using the Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ), while HRQoL was captured using the Euroqol-5-dimensions-5-Levels (EQ-5D-5L).

RESULTS

A total of 423 patients participated in the study. The mean global MTBQ, EQ-5D index, and EQ-VAS scores were 39.35 (± 22.16), 0.83 (± 0.20), and 67.32 (± 18.51), respectively. Significant differences were observed in the mean EQ-5D-Index (F [2, 81.88] 33.1) and EQ-VAS (visual analogue scale) scores (F [2, 75.48] = 72.87) among the treatment burden groups. Follow up post-hoc analyses demonstrated significant mean differences in EQ-VAS scores across the treatment burden groups and in EQ-5D index between the no/low treatment burden and high treatment burden, as well as between the medium treatment burden and high treatment burden. In the multivariate linear regression model, every one SD increase in the global MTBQ score (i.e., 22.16) was associated with a decline of 0.08 in the EQ-5D index (β - 0.38, 95%CI - 0.48,  - 0.28), as well as a reduction of 9.4 in the EQ-VAS score (β - 0.51, 95%CI -0.60, - 0.42).

CONCLUSION

Treatment burden was inversely associated with HRQoL. Health care providers should be conscious in balancing treatment exposure with patients' HRQoL.

UK Valuation of EQ-5D-5L, a Generic Measure of Health-Related Quality of Life: A Study Protocol

OBJECTIVES

A high-quality and widely accepted UK EQ-5D-5L value set is urgently required to enable the latest version of EQ-5D scored using recent UK public preferences to inform policy including health technology assessments submitted to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. This article outlines the study protocol for the generation of a new EQ-5D-5L UK value set.

METHODS

Twelve hundred interviews will be undertaken using the composite time trade-off elicitation technique for 102 health states (86 from the international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol, plus 16 with best predictive performance in an extended design used in the Native American EQ-5D-5L valuation). The sample will be UK adults (age ≥18 years) proportionately representative across England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, representative for age, sex, ethnicity, and socioeconomic group, with inclusion of participants with/without health problems. Participants will choose to be interviewed via videoconference (by Zoom) or in-person in a central venue. Data quality will be rigorously assessed.

RESULTS

The value set will be generated using tobit random effects and heteroscedastic tobit models (with censoring at -1) using all data, excluding time trade-off values highlighted by participants as ones they would reconsider and data from interviewers failing protocol compliance. Quality and acceptance will be achieved by public involvement, regular Steering Group meetings, independent assessment of data quality at 4 time points, and final endorsement of data and analyses.

CONCLUSION

This study will produce a UK value set for the EQ-5D-5L for use in prospective and retrospective data sets containing EQ-5D-5L data.

Comparing EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in measuring the HRQoL burden of 4 health conditions in China

BACKGROUND

EQ-5D-3L has been used in the National Health Services Survey of China since 2008 to monitor population health. The five-level version of EQ-5D was developed, but there lacks evidence to support the use of five-level version of EQ-5D in China. This study was conducted to compare the measurement properties of both the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in quantifying health-related quality of life (HRQoL) burden for 4 different health conditions in China.

METHODS

Participants from China were recruited to complete the 3L and 5L questionnaire via Internet. Quota was set to recruit five groups of individuals, with one group of individuals without any health condition and one group of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), HIV/AIDS, chronic Hepatitis B (CHB), or depression, respectively. The 3L and 5L were compared in terms of response distributions, percentages of reporting 'no problems', index value distributions, known-group validity and their relative efficiency.

RESULTS

In total, 500 individuals completed the online survey, including 140 healthy individuals, 122 individuals with hepatitis B, 107 with depression, 90 individuals with GAD and 101 with HIV/AIDS. 5L also had smoother and less clustered index value distributions. Healthy group showed different response distributions to the four condition groups. The percentage of reporting 'no problems' decreased significantly in the 5L in all domains (P < 0.01), especially in the pain/discomfort dimension (relative difference: 43.10%). Relative efficiency suggested that 5L had a higher absolute discriminatory power than the 3L version between healthy participant and the other 4 condition groups, especially for the HIV/AIDS group when the 3L results was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The 5L version may be preferable to the 3L, as it demonstrated superior performance with respect to higher sensitivity to mild health problems, better relative efficiency and responses and index value distributions.

Patient acceptable symptom state (PASS): thresholds for the EQ-5D-5L and Oxford hip and knee scores for patients with total hip and knee replacement

PURPOSE

To define patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) cut-off values for the EQ-5D-5L and Oxford hip (OHS) and knee (OKS) scores 6 and 12 months after total hip (THR) or knee (TKR) replacement. To compare PASS cut-off values for the EQ-5D-5L scored using: (1) the Canadian value set, (2) the crosswalk value set, and (3) the equal weighted Level Sum Score (LSS).

METHODS

We mailed questionnaires to consecutive patients following surgeon referral for primary THR or TKR and at 6 and 12 months post-surgery. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were the EQ-5D-5L, the OHS, and OKS. We assessed PASS cut-off values for PROMs using percentile and ROC methods, with the Youden Index.

RESULTS

Five hundred forty-two surgical patients (mean age, 64 years, 57% female, 49% THR) completed baseline and 12-month questionnaires. 89% of THR and 81% of TKR patients rated PASS as acceptable at 12 months. PASS cut-off values for THR for the EQ-5D-5L (Canadian) were 0.85 (percentile) and 0.84 (Youden) at 12 months. Cut-off values were similar for the LSS (0.85 and 0.85) and lower for the crosswalk value set (0.74 and 0.73), respectively. EQ-5D-5L cut-off values for TKR were Canadian, 0.77 (Percentile) and 0.78 (Youden), LSS, 0.75 and 0.80, and crosswalk, 0.67 and 0.74, respectively. Cut-off values 6 and 12 months post-surgery ranged from 38 to 39 for the OHS, and 28 to 36 for the OKS (range 0 worst to 48 best).

CONCLUSION

PASS cut-off values for the EQ-5D-5L and Oxford scores varied, not only between methods and timing of assessment, but also by different EQ-5D-5L value sets, which vary between countries. Because of this variation, PASS cut-off values are not necessarily generalizable to other populations of TJR patients. We advise caution in interpreting PROMs when using EQ-5D-5L PASS cut-off values developed in different countries. A standardization of methods is needed before published cut-off values can be used with confidence in other populations.

Predicting Patient-Level 3-Level Version of EQ-5D Index Scores From a Large International Database Using Machine Learning and Regression Methods

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the performance of machine learning and regression methods in the prediction of 3-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L) index scores from a large diverse data set.

METHODS

A total of 30 studies from 3 countries were combined. Predictions were performed via eXtreme Gradient Boosting classification (XGBC), eXtreme Gradient Boosting regression (XGBR) and ordinary least squares (OLS) regression using 10-fold cross-validation and 80%/20% partition for training and testing. We evaluated 6 prediction scenarios using 3 samples (general population, patients, total) and 2 predictor sets: demographic and disease-related variables with/without patient-reported outcomes. Model performance was evaluated by mean absolute error and percent of predictions within clinically irrelevant error range and within correct health severity group (EQ-5D-3L index <0.45, 0.45-0.926, >0.926).

RESULTS

The data set involved 26 318 individuals (clinical settings n = 6214, general population n = 20 104) and 26 predictor variables plus diagnoses. Using all predictors and the total sample, mean absolute error values were 0.153, 0.126, and 0.131, percent of predictions within clinically irrelevant error range were 47.6%, 39.5%, and 37.4%, and within the correct health severity group were 56.3%, 64.9%, and 63.3% by XGBC, XGBR, and OLS, respectively. The performance of models depended on the applied evaluation criteria, the target population, the included predictors, and the EQ-5D-3L index score range.

CONCLUSIONS

Regression models (XGBR and OLS) outperformed XGBC, yet prediction errors were outside the clinically irrelevant error range for most respondents. Our results highlight the importance of systematic patient-reported outcome (EQ-5D) data collection. Dialogs between artificial intelligence and outcomes research experts are encouraged to enhance the value of accumulating data in health systems.

Meaningful values of the EQ-5D-3L in patients undergoing primary knee arthroplasty

AIMS

The aim of this study was to report the meaningful values of the EuroQol five-dimension three-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) and EuroQol visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) in patients undergoing primary knee arthroplasty (KA).

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of patients undergoing primary KA for osteoarthritis in a university teaching hospital (Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh) (1 January 2013 to 31 December 2019). Pre- and postoperative (one-year) data were prospectively collected for 3,181 patients (median age 69.9 years (interquartile range (IQR) 64.2 to 76.1); females, n = 1,745 (54.9%); median BMI 30.1 kg/m² (IQR 26.6 to 34.2)). The reliability of the EQ-5D-3L was measured using Cronbach's alpha. Responsiveness was determined by calculating the anchor-based minimal clinically important difference (MCID), the minimal important change (MIC) (cohort and individual), the patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) predictive of satisfaction, and the minimal detectable change at 90% confidence intervals (MDC-90).

RESULTS

The EQ-5D-3L demonstrated good internal consistency with an overall Cronbach alpha of 0.75 (preoperative) and 0.88 (postoperative), respectively. The MCID for the Index score was 0.085 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.042 to 0.127) and EQ-VAS was 6.41 (95% CI 3.497 to 9.323). The MIC_COHORT was 0.289 for the EQ-5D and 5.27 for the EQ-VAS. However, the MIC_INDIVIDUAL for both the EQ-5D-3L Index (0.105) and EQ-VAS (-1) demonstrated poor-to-acceptable reliability. The MDC-90 was 0.023 for the EQ-5D-3L Index and 1.0 for the EQ-VAS. The PASS for the postoperative EQ-5D-3L Index and EQ-VAS scores predictive of patient satisfaction were 0.708 and 77.0, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The meaningful values of the EQ-5D-3L Index and EQ-VAS scores can be used to measure clinically relevant changes in health-related quality of life in patients undergoing primary KA.Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(9):619-628.

Health-Related Quality of Life and Its Related Factors in Survivors of Stroke in Rural China: A Large-Scale Cross-Sectional Study

Background

Stroke is a major health threat and the leading cause of mortality and disability in China. The aims of this study were to identify the possible influencing factors of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and its domain-specific contents in stroke patients in rural areas in China.

Methods

A total of 1,709 stroke patients aged 36–79 years from the baseline data of Henan Rural Cohort study (n = 39,259) were included in the cross-sectional study. The Chinese version of the European Quality of Life Five Dimension (including mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) Five Level Scale (EQ-5D-5L) and visual analog scale (VAS) were used to evaluate HRQoL in stroke patients. Tobit regression models, generalized linear models and binary logistic regression models were constructed to determine potential influencing factors of the EQ-5D utility index, as well as influencing factors of each domain and VAS score.

Results

The mean utility index and VAS scores of stroke patients were 0.885 (SD, 0.204), and 68.39 (SD, 17.31), respectively. Pain/discomfort (PD, 35.2%) and mobility (MO, 30.4%) were the most frequently reported issues. Regression models revealed that illiterate; a low monthly income; low physical activity intensity; and diabetes, anxiety, depression, or poor sleep quality were significantly associated with lower utility index and VAS scores among stroke patients. In addition, patients with stroke who were older, female, drinking, smoking, and consuming a high-fat diet, had a higher BMI, and lived with a stroke for a longer time, were also significantly associated with different dimensions of the EQ-5D.

Conclusion

Patients with stroke in rural areas in China had a low HRQoL. Factors associated with the EQ-5D utility index as well as each domain and VAS score, need to be considered by health providers in rural areas. Patients with stroke in rural areas need to be included in national basic public medical services and managed systematically by medical institutions.

Health-related quality of life after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest – a five-year follow-up study

BACKGROUND

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is affected after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), but data several years after the arrest are lacking. We assessed long-term HRQoL in OHCA survivors and how known outcome predictors impact HRQoL.

METHODS

In adult OHCA survivors, HRQoL was assessed five years post arrest using Short-form 36 (SF-36), EQ-5D-3 L (EQ-5D) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) among others. Results were compared to the next of kins' estimates and to a Norwegian reference population.

RESULTS

Altogether 96 survivors were included mean 5.3 (range 3.6-7.2) years after OHCA. HRQoL compared well to the reference population, except for lower score for general health with 67.2 (95%CI (62.1; 72.3) vs. 72.9 (71.9; 74.0)), p = 0.03. Younger (≤58 years) vs. older survivors scored lower for general health with mean (SD) of 62.1 (27.5) vs. 73.0 (19.5), p = 0.03, vitality (55.2 (20.5) vs. 64.6 (17.3), p = 0.02, social functioning (75.3 (28.7) vs. 94.1 (13.5), p < 0.001 and mental component summary (49.0 (9.9) vs. 55.8 (6.7), p < 0.001. They scored higher for HADS-anxiety (4.8 (3.6 vs. 2.7 (2.5), p = 0.001, and had lower EQ-5D index (0.72 (0.34) vs. 0.84 (0.19), p = 0.04. Early vs. late awakeners had higher EQ-5D index (0.82 (0.23) vs. 0.71 (0.35), p = 0.04 and lower HADS-depression scores (2.5 (2.9) vs. 3.8 (2.3), p = 0.04. Next of kin estimated HRQoL similar to the survivors' own estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

HRQoL five years after OHCA was good and mainly comparable to a matched reference population. Stratified analyses revealed impaired HRQoL among younger survivors and those awakening late, mainly for mental domains.

Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L: a systematic review of the literature

PURPOSE

Although the EQ-5D has a long history of use in a wide range of populations, the newer five-level version (EQ-5D-5L) has not yet had such extensive experience. This systematic review summarizes the available published scientific evidence on the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L.

METHODS

Pre-determined key words and exclusion criteria were used to systematically search publications from 2011 to 2019. Information on study characteristics and psychometric properties were extracted: specifically, EQ-5D-5L distribution (including ceiling and floor), missing values, reliability (test-retest), validity (convergent, known-groups, discriminate) and responsiveness (distribution, anchor-based). EQ-5D-5L index value means, ceiling and correlation coefficients (convergent validity) were pooled across the studies using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Of the 889 identified publications, 99 were included for review, representing 32 countries. Musculoskeletal/orthopedic problems and cancer (n = 8 each) were most often studied. Most papers found missing values (17 of 17 papers) and floor effects (43 of 48 papers) to be unproblematic. While the index was found to be reliable (9 of 9 papers), individual dimensions exhibited instability over time. Index values and dimensions demonstrated moderate to strong correlations with global health measures, other multi-attribute utility instruments, physical/functional health, pain, activities of daily living, and clinical/biological measures. The instrument was not correlated with life satisfaction and cognition/communication measures. Responsiveness was addressed by 15 studies, finding moderate effect sizes when confined to studied subgroups with improvements in health.

CONCLUSIONS

The EQ-5D-5L exhibits excellent psychometric properties across a broad range of populations, conditions and settings. Rigorous exploration of its responsiveness is needed.

Properties of the EQ-5D-3L index distribution when longitudinal data from 27,328 spine surgery procedures are applied to nine national EQ-5D-3L value sets

PURPOSE

The purpose of the current study was to apply a single large longitudinal EQ-5D-3L data set to several national EQ-5D-3L value sets and explore differences in EQ-5D-3L index density functions and effect sizes before and after treatment.

METHODS

Patients, surgically treated for lumbar spinal stenosis or lumbar disk herniation between 2007 and 2017, were recruited from the national Swedish spine register. A total of 27,328 procedures were eligible for analysis. The EQ-5D health states were coded to EQ-5D-3L summary indices using value sets for 9 countries: Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, Germany, Italy, Sweden, the UK, and the US. The EQ-5D-3L summary index distributions were then estimated with kernel density estimation. The change in EQ-5D-3L index before and after treatment was evaluated with the standardized response mean (SRM).

RESULTS

There was a high variability in the resulting EQ-5D-3L index density functions. There were also considerable differences in EQ-5D-3L index density functions before and after treatment using the same value set. Effect sizes of 2-year change (SRM), however, were similar when the 9 value sets were applied on pre- and post-treatment data.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a marked variability in EQ-5D-3L index density functions when a single large data set was applied to 9 national EQ-5D-3L value sets. Consequently, studies that aggregate international data, e.g. meta-analyses, may produce misleading results if the underlying differences in EQ-5D-3L index density functions are inadequately handled. On the basis of the results of our study, we recommend against pooling of different national EQ-5D-3L index data.

Measurement, modeling and QALYs

Over the past 30 years, a mainstay of health technology assessment has been the creation of modeled incremental cost-per-quality adjusted life year (QALY) claims. These are intended to inform resource allocation decisions. Unfortunately, the reliance on the construction of QALYs from generic utility scales is misplaced. Those advocating QALY-based lifetime modeled claims fail to appreciate the limitations placed on these constructs by the axioms of fundamental measurement. Utility scales, such as those created by the EQ-5D-3L instrument, are nothing more than multidimensional, ordinal scales. Such scales cannot support basic arithmetic operations. Interval scales can support addition and subtraction; ratio scales the further operations of multiplication and division. Those who advocate the construction of QALYs fail to appreciate that such an operation is only possible if the utility scale is unidimensional and has ratio properties with a true zero. The utility measures available do not meet these requirements. As we cannot produce meaningful utility values, the QALY is an invalid construct. Consequently, cost-per-incremental QALY claims are impossible to sustain and the application of cost-per QALY thresholds meaningless. As utility is a latent, unidimensional variable, the best a measure of utility could achieve would be unidimensionality and interval scaling properties. Where such measures are available, they could support claims for response to therapy. Consequently, there would be no need to continue constructing imaginary lifetime value assessment frameworks. Admitting that the QALY is a fatally flawed construct means rejecting 30 years of cost-per-QALY models.

Surgical Treatment of Degenerative Disk Disease in Three Scandinavian Countries: An International Register Study Based on Three Merged National Spine Registers

STUDY DESIGN

Observational study of prospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVES

Patients with chronic low back pain resistant to nonoperative treatment often face a poor prognosis for recovery. The aim of the current study was to compare the variation and outcome of surgical treatment of degenerative disc disease in the Scandinavian countries based on The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement core spine data sets.

METHODS

Anonymized individual level data from 3 national registers were pooled into 1 database. At the time of surgery, the patient reports data on demographics, lifestyle topics, comorbidity, and data on health-related quality of life such as Oswestry Disability Index, Euro-Qol-5D, and back and leg pain scores. The surgeon records diagnosis, type of surgery performed, and complications. One-year follow-ups are obtained with questionnaires. Baseline and 1-year follow-up data were analyzed to expose any differences between the countries.

RESULTS

A total of 1893 patients were included. At 1-year follow-up, 1315 (72%) patients responded. There were statistically significant baseline differences in age, smoking, comorbidity, frequency of previous surgery and intensity of back and leg pain. Isolated fusion was the primary procedure in all the countries ranging from 84% in Denmark to 76% in Sweden. There was clinically relevant improvement in all outcome measures except leg pain.

CONCLUSIONS

In homogenous populations with similar health care systems the treatment traditions can vary considerably. Despite variations in preoperative variables, patient reported outcomes improve significantly and clinically relevant with surgical treatment.

EQ-5D in coronary patients: what are they suffering from? Results from the ESC EORP European Survey of Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and Diabetes (EUROASPIRE IV) Registry

OBJECTIVE

Coronary patients often suffer from an impaired health, hence the aim of this study is to assess how coronary patients score on the different EQ-5D dimensions.

METHODS

Analyses are based on the EUROASPIRE IV survey, conducted across 24 European countries. 7567 patients with stable coronary heart disease (mean age = 64.1 (SD = 9.6); males = 75.8%) completed the EQ-5D-5L instrument, 6 months to 3 years after their index hospitalization. Descriptive statistics and multilevel logistic regression was used to assess the differences between patient groups in reported problems on the EQ-5D dimensions. Furthermore, age-standardized country-specific outcomes were reported.

RESULTS

About one out of four patients reported to have no problems on all five dimensions (57.9% reported no problems on mobility, 88.4% reported no problems on self-care, 67.1% reported no problems on usual activities, 41.1% reported no problems on pain/discomfort, and 56.2% reported no problems on anxiety/depression). Elderly patients and females reported more problems. Patients with behavioral risk factors and patients with comorbidities were more likely to have severe or extreme problems. Comparison across countries showed major differences in reported problems.

CONCLUSIONS

Whether or not coronary patients have problems on one or more EQ-5D dimension, as well as the severity of the problems reported is largely associated with the patient profile. The least problems are seen on the self-care dimension and most problems are reported on the pain/discomfort dimension.

The EQ-5D-5L Is Superior to the -3L Version in Measuring Health-related Quality of Life in Patients Awaiting THA or TKA

BACKGROUND

As a generic measure of health-related quality of life among patients awaiting THA or TKA, the three-level version of the EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L), which has three response levels of severity (no problems, some problems, and extreme problems/unable) to five questions, is widely used. Previous studies indicated that the ceiling effect of the EQ-5D-3L limits its application. The five-level version of the EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) was developed to enhance the measurement properties of the tool by adding two levels: slight problems and severe problems. However, only a few small studies have compared the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in patients awaiting THA and TKA.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The purpose of this study was to examine the performance of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L among patients awaiting THA or TKA in terms of (1) response patterns, (2) convergent construct validity, (3) known-group validity, and (4) informativity and discriminatory power.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of the Alberta Bone and Joint Health Data Repository, which recorded information on all patients receiving hip or knee arthroplasties between April 2010 and March 2017 in Alberta, Canada (n = 37,377). Patients receiving THA or TKA and who completed the EQ-5D and WOMAC at baseline (presurgery) were included in this study (n = 24,766). The EQ-5D-3L was administered to all patients in 2010, and was gradually replaced by the EQ-5D-5L between 2013 and 2016; the EQ-5D-5L reached full application in all clinics by 2017.A propensity score was used to match patients 1:1 who completed either the EQ-5D-3L or EQ-5D-5L before surgery. Response patterns have been explored using ceiling and floor effects and distribution across severity levels of each dimension. Convergent construct validity was examined using Spearman's correlation (rho) against the WOMAC. Known-group validity was examined by gender, preoperative risk factors, mental health, obesity, and WOMAC physical function score. Informativity and discriminatory power were examined using the Shannon (H') and Shannon evenness (J') indices. A total of 3446 pairs of patients awaiting THA (55% women; mean age, 66 years) and 5428 pairs of patients awaiting TKA (59% women; mean age 67 years) were included in this analysis; the study group included all patients who were kept in the propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Ceiling and floor effects were comparable and small (less than 0.5%) for both versions; the responses across severity levels for each dimension were more evenly distributed for the EQ-5D-5L. Convergent construct validity was stronger for the EQ-5D-5L as it consistently had stronger correlations with the WOMAC overall and domain scores than the EQ-5D-3L (rho(3L-THA), -0.77 to -0.31; rho(3L-TKA), -0.71 to -0.24; rho(5L-THA), -0.71 to -0.17; rho(5L-TKA), -0.64 to -0.17; all p values < 0.001). The hypotheses of known-group analyses were confirmed for both versions. The EQ-5D-5L demonstrated stronger informativity and discriminatory power than the EQ-5D-3L, particularly for the mobility dimension (THA, H'(5L/3L)=1.66/0.37, J'(5L/3L)=0.72/0.23; TKA, H'(5L/3L)=1.66/0.41, J'(5L/3L)=0.71/0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the superior construct validity, and informativity and discriminatory power of the EQ-5D-5L compared with the EQ-5D-3L among patients awaiting THA or TKA.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Compared with the three-level version, the five-level version of the EQ-5D differentiates between patients awaiting THA and TKA much better based on their mobility, which is a key health aspect or outcome in these patients. Our findings suggest that the EQ-5D-5L is more appropriate for this population.

Distribution of the EQ-5D-5L Profiles and Values in Three Patient Groups

BACKGROUND

The distribution of EQ-5D-3L values (health state profiles, weighted by value sets) often shows two distinct groups, arising from both the distribution of profiles and the characteristics of value sets. To date, there is little evidence about the distribution of EQ-5D-5L values.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the distribution of EQ-5D-5L profiles; to compare the distributions of EQ-5D-5L values arising from the English value set (EVS) and a 'mapped' value set (MVS); and to develop further the methods used to investigate clustering within EQ-5D data.

METHODS

We obtained data from Cambridgeshire Community Services NHS Trust containing EQ-5D-5L profiles before treatment for three patient groups: community rehabilitation (N=6919); musculoskeletal physiotherapy (N=19999); and specialist nursing services (N=3366). Values were calculated using the EVS and MVS. Clusters were examined using the k-means method and Calinski-Harabasz pseudo-F index stopping rule.

RESULTS

We found no evidence for clustering of EQ-5D-5L values arising from the classification system and no strong or consistent evidence of clustering arising from the EVS. There was clearer evidence of clustering using the MVS, with two being the optimal number of clusters. The clusters that were found for the EVS were very different from the MVS clusters.

CONCLUSIONS

Unlike the EQ-5D-3L, clustering of EQ-5D-5L values does not seem to be driven by clustering of its profile. This suggests the EQ-5D-5L is superior in that it is less likely to generate artefactual clusters - however, clusters may still result from using value sets such as MVS that have the tendency to generate them.

A preference-based item response theory model to measure health: concept and mathematics of the multi-attribute preference response model

BACKGROUND

A new patient-reported health measurement model has been developed to quantify descriptions of health states. Known as the multi-attribute preference response (MAPR) model, it is based on item response theory. The response task in the MAPR is for a patient to judge whether hypothetical health-state descriptions are better or worse than his/her own health status.

METHODS

In its most simple form MAPR is a Rasch model where for each respondent on the same unidimensional health scale values are estimated of their own health status and values of the hypothetical comparator health states. These values reflect the quality or severity of the health states. Alternatively, the respondents are offered health-state descriptions that are based on a classification system (e.g., multi-attribute) with a fixed number of health attributes, each with a limited number of levels. In the latter variant, the weights of the levels of the attributes in the descriptive system, which represents the range of the health states, are estimated. The results of a small empirical study are presented to illustrate the procedures of the MAPR model and possible extensions of the model are discussed.

RESULTS

The small study that we conducted to illustrate the procedure and results of our proposed method to measure the quality of health states and patients' own health status showed confirming results.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper introduces the typical MAPR model and shows how it extends the basic Rasch model with a regression function for the attributes of the health-state classification system.

Is EQ-5D-5L Better Than EQ-5D-3L? A Head-to-Head Comparison of Descriptive Systems and Value Sets from Seven Countries

OBJECTIVE

This study describes the first empirical head-to-head comparison of EQ-5D-3L (3L) and EQ-5D-5L (5L) value sets for multiple countries.

METHODS

A large multinational dataset, including 3L and 5L data for eight patient groups and a student cohort, was used to compare 3L versus 5L value sets for Canada, China, England/UK (5L/3L, respectively), Japan, The Netherlands, South Korea and Spain. We used distributional analyses and two methods exploring discriminatory power: relative efficiency as assessed by the F statistic, and an area under the curve for the receiver-operating characteristics approach. Differences in outcomes were explored by separating descriptive system effects from valuation effects, and by exploring distributional location effects.

RESULTS

In terms of distributional evenness, efficiency of scale use and the face validity of the resulting distributions, 5L was superior, leading to an increase in sensitivity and precision in health status measurement. When compared with 5L, 3L systematically overestimated health problems and consequently underestimated utilities. This led to bias, i.e. over- or underestimations of discriminatory power.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that 5L provides more precise measurement at individual and group levels, both in terms of descriptive system data and utilities. The increased sensitivity and precision of 5L is likely to be generalisable to longitudinal studies, such as in intervention designs. Hence, we recommend the use of the 5L across applications, including economic evaluation, clinical and public health studies. The evaluative framework proved to be useful in assessing preference-based instruments and might be useful for future work in the development of descriptive systems or health classifications.

Comparing the UK EQ-5D-3L and English EQ-5D-5L Value Sets

BACKGROUND

Three EQ-5D value sets (EQ-5D-3L, crosswalk, and EQ-5D-5L) are now available for cost-utility analysis in the UK and/or England. The value sets' characteristics differ, and it is important to assess the implications of these differences.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper is to compare the three value sets.

METHODS

We carried out analysis comparing the predicted values from each value set, and investigated how differences in health on the descriptive system is reflected in the utility score by assessing the value of adjacent states. We also assessed differences in values using data from patients who completed both EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L.

RESULTS

The distribution of the value sets systematically differed. EQ-5D-5L values were higher than EQ-5D-3L/crosswalk values. The overall range and difference between adjacent states was smaller. In the patient data, the EQ-5D-5L produced higher values across all conditions and there was some evidence that the value sets rank different health conditions in a similar severity order.

CONCLUSIONS

There are important differences between the value sets. Due to the smaller range of EQ-5D-5L values, the possible change in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) might be reduced, but they will apply to both control and intervention groups, and will depend on whether the gain is in quality of life, survival, or both. The increased sensitivity of EQ-5D-5L may also favour QALY gains even if the changes in utility are smaller. Further work should assess the impact of the different value sets on cost effectiveness by repeating the analysis on clinical trial data.

Factors influencing health-related quality of life in patients with Type 1 diabetes

Aims

Generic, preference-based measures of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are a common input to the economic evaluation of new health technologies. As such, it is important to explore what characteristics of patients with Type 1 diabetes might impact scores on such measures.

Methods

This study utilizes baseline data from a cluster-randomized trial that recruited patients with Type 1 diabetes at six centers across Ireland. Health-related quality of life was assessed using the three-level EuroQol EQ-5D (EQ-5D) measure. Patients’ responses to individual dimensions of the EQ-5D were explored. To see which patient factors influenced EQ-5D scores, multivariate regression analysis was conducted with EQ-5D scores as the outcome variable.

Results

Data was available for 437 Type 1 diabetes patients. The median age of these patients was 40 (IQR: 31-49) years and 53.8% were female. Overall, patients reported a high HRQoL based on EQ-5D scores (0.87 (SD: 0.19). Fifty-four percent of patients reported a perfect HRQoL. For those that reported problems, the most common dimension was the anxiety/depression dimension of the EQ-5D (29.6%). In the multivariate regression analysis, self-reported mental illness (− 0.22 (95% CI: -0.34, − 0.10)) and being unemployed (− 0.07 (95% CI: -0.13, − 0.02)) were negatively associated with EQ-5D scores (p < 0.05). The influence of self-reported mental illness was persistent in sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions

The study results indicate that patients with Type 1 diabetes report a high HRQoL based on responses to the EQ-5D. However, there are a substantial number of Type 1 diabetes patients that report problems in the anxiety/depression dimension, which may provide avenues to improve patients’ HRQoL.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN79759174.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12955-018-0848-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Valuing health-related quality of life: An EQ-5D-5L value set for England

A new version of the EQ-5D, the EQ-5D-5L, is available. The aim of this study is to produce a value set to support use of EQ-5D-5L data in decision-making. The study design followed an international research protocol. Randomly selected members of the English general public completed 10 time trade-off and 7 discrete choice experiment tasks in face-to-face interviews. A 20-parameter hybrid model was used to combine time trade-off and discrete choice experiment data to generate values for the 3,125 EQ-5D-5L health states. Valuation data are available for 996 respondents. Face validity of the data has been demonstrated, with more severe health states generally given lower values. Problems with pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression received the greatest weight. Compared to the existing EQ-5D-3L value set, there are considerably fewer "worse than dead" states (5.1%, compared with over one third), and the minimum value is higher. Values range from -0.285 (extreme problems on all dimensions) to 0.950 (for health states 11211 and 21111). Results have important implications for users of the EQ-5D-5L both in England and internationally. Quality-adjusted life year gains from interventions seeking to improve very poor health may be smaller using this value set and may previously have been overestimated.

An Experience-Based Value Set for the EQ-5D-5L in Germany

OBJECTIVE

Valuation of health states provides a summary measure useful to health care decision makers. Results may depend on whether the currently experienced health state or a hypothetical health state is being evaluated. This study derives a value set for the EuroQoL Five-Dimensional Five-Level Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) by focusing on the individual's current experience.

DATA AND METHODS

Data include four pooled population surveys of the general German population in 2012-2015 (N = 8114). For valuation, a visual analogue scale (VAS) was used. Six specifications of a generalized linear model with binomial error distribution and constraint parameter estimation were analyzed. In each 1000 simulation runs, models were cross-validated after splitting the sample into an estimation part and a validation part. Predictive accuracy was measured by mean absolute error and sum of squared errors.

RESULTS

The models rendered a consistent set of parameters. With regard to predictive accuracy, the model considering all problem levels within the five dimensions and the highest problem level reached performed best overall.

DISCUSSION

Estimation proved to be feasible. Predictive accuracy exceeded that of a similar, experience-based value set for the EQ-5D-3L. Compared with a Dutch value set for the EQ-5D-5L derived for hypothetical health states, experienced values tended to be slightly lower for mild health states and substantially higher for severe health states. Clinical relevance and usefulness of the value set remain to be determined in future studies.

CONCLUSIONS

For decision makers who prioritize patient-relevant benefit, the experience-based value set provides a novel option to summarize health states, reflecting how health states experienced are valued in a population.

Health-related quality of life measured using the EQ-5D-5L: South Australian population norms

BACKGROUND

Although a five level version of the widely-used EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ-5D) instrument has been developed, population norms are not yet available for Australia to inform the future valuation of health in economic evaluations. The aim of this study was to estimate HrQOL normative values for the EQ-5D-5L preference-based measure in a large, randomly selected, community sample in South Australia.

METHODS

The EQ-5D-5L instrument was included in the 2013 South Australian Health Omnibus Survey, an interviewer-administered, face-to-face, cross-sectional survey. Respondents rated their level of impairment across dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) and global health rating on a visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS). Utility scores were derived using the newly-developed UK general population-based algorithm and relationships between utility and EQ-VAS scores and socio-demographic factors were also explored using multivariate regression analyses.

RESULTS

Ultimately, 2,908 adults participated in the survey (63.4 % participation rate). The mean utility and EQ-VAS scores were 0.91 (95 CI 0.90, 0.91) and 78.55 (95 % CI 77.95, 79.15), respectively. Almost half of respondents reported no problems across all dimensions (42.8 %), whereas only 7.2 % rated their health >90 on the EQ-VAS (100 = the best health you can imagine). Younger age, male gender, longer duration of education, higher annual household income, employment and marriage/de facto relationships were all independent, statistically significant predictors of better health status (p < 0.01) measured with the EQ-VAS. Only age and employment status were associated with higher utility scores, indicating fundamental differences between these measures of health status.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first Australian study to apply the EQ-5D-5L in a large, community sample. Overall, findings are consistent with EQ-5D-5L utility and VAS scores reported for other countries and indicate that the majority of South Australian adults report themselves in full health. When valuing health in Australian economic evaluations, the utility population norms can be used to estimate HrQOL. More generally, the EQ-VAS score may be a better measure of population health given the smaller ceiling effect and broader coverage of HrQOL dimensions. Further research is recommended to update EQ-5D-5L population norms using the Australian general population specific scoring algorithm once this becomes publically available.