A Qualitative Investigation of Older Adults’ Conceptualization of Quality of Life and a Think-Aloud Content Validation of the EQ-5D-5L,SF-12v2, Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale,and Office of National Statistics-4.

ObjectivesOld age is characterized by declining health, comorbidities, and increasing health and social care service use. Traditionally, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including the EQ-5D-5L and SF-12v2 have focused on health. Nevertheless, aged care often aims to improve broader elements of quality of life (QoL), captured by well-being measures, such as the Warwick Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS) and Office of National Statistics-4 (ONS-4). This study investigates older adults’ conceptualization of QoL and the content validity of the EQ-5D-5L, SF-12v2, WEMWBS, and ONS-4 in measuring their QoL.MethodsQualitative cognitive think-aloud interviews were undertaken with older adults aged 75+, exploring their views on what was important to QoL and, for each measure, the relevance, acceptability, and interpretation of items; suitability of response options; and the comprehensiveness of the measure. Conceptualization of QoL was analyzed thematically and content validity using framework analysis.ResultsTwenty interviews were undertaken. Older adults’ conceptualization of QoL centered on health, ability to perform usual activities, social contact, and emotional functioning. Possible response shift was observed, as older adults assessed their health relative to lower health expectations at their age or to people in worse states. Participants questioned the relevance of negatively phrased mental items and often preferred the functioning-focused EQ-5D-5L to more subjective ONS-4 and WEMWBS items. Domains suggested to improve comprehensiveness included social contact, coping, security, dignity, and control.ConclusionsThese findings are useful to researchers developing new PROMs for older adults or for the developers of included PROMs considering permanently adapting or bolting-on domains to improve content validity in older adults.     

The Use of Generic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Emergency Department Surveys: Discriminant Validity Evidence for the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey and the EQ-5D

ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare discriminant validity evidence of 2 generic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) and level 5 of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L), for use in emergency departments (EDs).MethodsData were obtained via a cross-sectional survey of 5876 patients in British Columbia (Canada) who completed a questionnaire after visiting an ED in 2018. We compared the extent to which the VR-12 and the EQ-5D-5L distinguished among groups of ED patients with different levels of comorbidity burden and self-reported physical and mental or emotional health status. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the ability of the 2 PROMs to identify patients presenting with a mental health (MH) condition.ResultsAll the measures produced small effect sizes (ESs) for discriminating comorbidity levels (R² range: 0.00 [VR-12 mental component summary {MCS}] to 0.10 [VR-12 physical component summary score]). The EQ-5D visual analog scale offered the largest ES for discriminating self-reported physical health (R² = 0.48), whereas the MCS, the VR-12 MH domain, and the EQ-5D-5L anxiety/depression dimension had the largest ESs for discriminating self-reported mental or emotional health (R² = 0.42, 0.40, and 0.38, respectively). The MCS produced a medium ES (R² = 0.42) along with the VR-12 utility score (R² = 0.27) compared with the EQ-5D-5L index (R² = 0.19). Having a MH condition was predominantly identified by the MCS (Pratt index = 0.56).ConclusionsThe VR-12 PROM provides a more comprehensive measurement of MH than the EQ-5D-5L, which is important to inform healthcare service needs for patients who present in EDs with MH challenges.     

Estimating Cost-Effectiveness Using Alternative Preference-Based Scores and Within-Trial Methods: Exploring the Dynamics of the Quality-Adjusted Life-Year Using the EQ-5D 5-Level Version and Recovering Quality of Life Utility Index

ObjectivesThis study aimed to explore quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and subsequent cost-effectiveness estimates based on the more physical health–focused EQ-5D 5-level version (EQ-5D-5L) value set for England or cross-walked EQ-5D 3-level version UK value set scores or more mental health recovery-focused Recovering Quality of Life Utility Index (ReQoL-UI), when using alternative within-trial statistical methods. We describe possible reasons for the different QALY estimates based on the interaction between item scores, health state profiles, preference-based scores, and mathematical and statistical methods chosen.MethodsQALYs are calculated over 8 weeks from a case study 2:1 (intervention:control) randomized controlled trial in patients with anxiety or depression. Complete case and with missing cases imputed using multiple-imputation analyses are conducted, using unadjusted and regression baseline-adjusted QALYs. Cost-effectiveness is judged using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and acceptability curves. We use previously established psychometric results to reflect on estimated QALYs.ResultsA total of 361 people (241:120) were randomized. EQ-5D-5L crosswalk produced higher incremental QALYs than the value set for England or ReQoL-UI, which produced similar unadjusted QALYs, but contrasting baseline-adjusted QALYs. Probability of cost-effectiveness <£30 000 per QALY ranged from 6% (complete case ReQoL-UI baseline-adjusted QALYs) to 64.3% (multiple-imputation EQ-5D-5L crosswalk unadjusted QALYs). The control arm improved more on average than the intervention arm on the ReQoL-UI, a result not mirrored on the EQ-5D-5L nor condition-specific (Patient-Health Questionnaire-9, depression; Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, anxiety) measures.ConclusionsReQoL-UI produced contradictory cost-effectiveness results relative to the EQ-5D-5L. The EQ-5D-5L’s better responsiveness and “anxiety/depression” and “usual activities” items drove the incremental QALY results. The ReQoL-UI’s single physical health item and “personal recovery” construct may have influenced its lower 8-week incremental QALY estimates in this patient sample.     

The quality of life questionnaire EQ-5D-5L: psychometric properties and normative values for the general German population

Purpose

The health state classifier EQ-5D of the EuroQoL group has been expanded to a 5-level instrument (EQ-5D-5L), but studies on psychometric properties of this new instrument, applied to the general population, are rare.

Methods

A sample of 2,469 subjects, representatively selected from the German general population, was asked to fill in the EQ-5D-5L and several other questionnaires. Crude sum scores of the EQ-5D-5L were calculated and compared with scores derived from two sets of utilities, one from a German and one from a UK sample.

Results

The mean sum score (0–100 scale) was 91.5. Males reported better health states than females, and there was a nearly linear age trend. The list of the 45 most frequent health patterns (those with at least 0.2 % of the respondents) showed that almost half of the participants (47.5 %) responded being in the optimal health state, indicating a ceiling effect. Correlations between EQ-5D-5L scores and other questionnaires were very similar for all three scoring systems of the EQ-5D-5L. Finally, normative scores are given on the basis of sum scores.

Conclusions

The applicability of the EQ-5D-5L in the general population is limited because of the skewness. Sum scores are useful because of their simplicity, international generalizability, and construct validity.     

项目反应理论在SF-36心理测量学特征评价中的应用

目的使用项目反应理论(item response theory,IRT)对SF-36量表进行分析,探讨更适合于量表分析的方法。方法采用横断面研究。使用SF-36量表调查526例确诊的鼻咽癌患者,使用部分评分模型对反映生理健康的21个条目进行分析:计算PSI(person separation index),估计阈值参数和生存质量,对性别、年龄、婚姻等进行项目功能差异(DIF)分析。结果 PSI=0.85,整个模型的拟合效果好;除了条目3i、3j、8的阈值参数顺序出现颠倒外,其余条目均符合理论假设;DIF分析结果显示,所有的条目都没有非一致性DIF,条目4a在性别上存在一致性DIF,条目3g、10a在病人来源上存在一致性DIF。结论 SF-36生理健康的21个条目基本满足单维性、局部独立性的要求,可以放在一起进行IRT分析。IRT能够克服等级资料的限制,能力参数与阈值参数定义在同一个标尺上,而且存在参数不变性的优点,更加适合量表的分析评价。     

New Zealand Population Norms for the EQ-5D-5L Constructed From the Personal Value Sets of Participants in a National Survey

ObjectivesTo derive New Zealand (NZ) population norms for the EQ-5D-5L and to examine the association between participants’ sociodemographic characteristics and their health-related quality of life.MethodsData from the 2018 NZ EQ-5D-5L valuation study (n = 2468) were used. Each participant’s 5-digit profile was converted to a single utility value using their personal value set. The profiles, mean utility values, and mean EuroQol visual analog scale (EQ-VAS) scores were summarized by dimension and disaggregated by age group and gender. Multivariable logistic and Tobit regressions were used to investigate the association between participants’ sociodemographic characteristics and the EQ-5D-5L dimensions, utility values, and EQ-VAS scores.ResultsThe mean utility value was 0.847 and the mean EQ-VAS score was 74.8. Of the 3125 possible EQ-5D-5L profiles, 25 profiles represented the current health status of the majority of participants (78%). The odds of having problems with anxiety or depression was greatest for people aged 18 to 24 years and decreased with age. People with a long-term disability or chronic illness had greater odds of problems on all dimensions and lower (poorer) utility values and EQ-VAS scores. Age, ethnicity, employment status, long-term disability, and chronic illness were associated with utility.ConclusionEQ-5D-5L population norms were derived for the NZ population using the personal value sets of 2468 participants. Consistent with other countries’ population norms, EQ-5D-5L utility values and EQ-VAS scores were associated with age, employment status, long-term disability, and chronic illness. These norms will support resource allocation decision making and help in understanding the health-related quality of life of the NZ population.     

A Comparison of a Preliminary Version of the EQ-HWB Short and the 5-Level Version EQ-5D

ObjectivesThe EQ Health and Wellbeing Short (EQ-HWB-S) is a new broad generic measure of health and wellbeing for use in economic evaluations of interventions across healthcare, social care, and public health. This measure conceptually overlaps with the 5-level version EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L), while expanding on the coverage of health and social care related dimensions. This study aims to examine the extent to which the EQ-HWB-S and EQ-5D-5L overlap and are different.MethodsA sample of US-based respondents (n = 903; n = 400 cancer survivors and n = 503 general population) completed a survey administered via an online panel. The survey included the EQ-HWB item pool (62 items, including 11 items used in this analysis), EQ-5D-5L, and questions about sociodemographic and health characteristics. The analysis included (Spearman’s) correlations, the comparison of patterns of response (distributions and ceiling effects), and the ability to discriminate between known groups.ResultsModerate to strong associations were found between conceptually overlapping dimensions of the EQ-5D-5L and the EQ-HWB-S (r_s > 0.5, P < .001). Among respondents reporting full health on the EQ-5D-5L (n = 161, 18.23%), the EQ-HWB-S identified ceiling effects, particularly with the item “feeling exhausted.” Most EQ-5D-5L and EQ-HWB-S items demonstrated discriminative ability among those with and without physical and mental conditions, yielding medium (> 0.5) to large effect sizes (> 0.8). Nevertheless, only EQ-HWB-S items distinguished between caregivers and noncaregivers and those with low and high caregiver burden, albeit with small effect sizes (0.2-0.5).ConclusionsResults indicate a convergence between the measures, especially between overlapping dimensions, lending support to the validity of the EQ-HWB-S. The EQ-HWB-S performed similarly or better than the EQ-5D-5L among patient groups and is better able to differentiate among caregivers and respondents closer to full health.     

A Direct Comparison of the Measurement Properties of EQ-5D-5L,PROMIS-29+2 and PROMIS Global Health Instruments and EQ-5D-5L and PROPr Utilities in a General Population Sample

ObjectivesWe aimed to compare measurement properties of the 5-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) and 2 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) short forms, PROMIS-29+2 and PROMIS Global Health (PROMIS-GH-10), and of EQ-5D-5L and PROMIS-preference scoring system (PROPr) utilities.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted in a general population sample in Hungary (N = 1631). We compared the following measurement properties at the level of items, domains, and utilities, the latter using corresponding US value sets: ceiling and floor, informativity (Shannon’s indices), agreement, convergent, and known-group validity. For the analyses, PROMIS items/domains were matched to EQ-5D-5L domains that cover similar concepts of health.ResultsThe majority of PROMIS items showed enhanced distributional characteristics, including lower ceilings and higher informativity than the EQ-5D-5L. Good convergent validity was established between EQ-5D-5L and PROMIS domains capturing similar aspects of health. Mean EQ-5D-5L utilities were substantially higher than those of PROPr (0.864 vs 0.535). EQ-5D-5L utilities correlated moderately or strongly with PROPr (r = 0.61), PROMIS-GH-10 physical (r = 0.68), and mental health summary scores (r = 0.53). EQ-5D-5L utilities decreased with age, whereas PROPr utilities slightly increased with age. EQ-5D-5L utilities discriminated significantly better in 12/28 (ratio of F-statistics) and 18/26 (area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve ratio) known groups defined by age, self-perceived health status, and self-reported physician-diagnosed health conditions, including hypertension, diabetes, coronary heart disease, chronic kidney disease, and stroke.ConclusionsThis study provides comparative evidence on the measurement properties of EQ-5D-5L, PROMIS-29+2, and PROMIS-GH-10 and informs decisions about the choice of instruments in population health surveys for assessment of patients’ health and for cost-utility analyses.     

The Impact of Differences between Patient and General Population EQ-5D-3L Values on the Mean Tariff Scores of Different Patient Groups

BackgroundHealth states can be valued by those who currently experience a health state (experienced health states [EHS]) or by the general public, who value a set of given health states (GHS) described to them. There has been debate over which method is more appropriate when making resource allocation decisions.ObjectiveThis article informs this debate by assessing whether differences between these methods have an effect on the mean EQ-5D-3L tariff scores of different patient groups.MethodsThe European tariff based on GHS valuations was compared with a German EHS tariff. Comparison was made in the context of EQ-5D-3L health states describing a number of diagnosed chronic diseases (stroke, diabetes, myocardial infarction, and cancer) taken from the Cooperative Health Research in the Augsburg Region population surveys. Comparison was made of both the difference in weighting of the dimensions of the EQ-5D-3L and differences in mean tariff scores for patient groups.ResultsWeighting of the dimensions of the EQ-5D-3L were found to be systematically different. The EHS tariff gave significantly lower mean scores for most, but not all, patient groups despite tariff scores being lower for 213 of 243 EQ-5D-3L health states using the GHS tariff. Differences were found to vary between groups, with the largest change in difference being 5.45 in the multiple stoke group.ConclusionsThe two tariffs have systematic differences that in certain patient groups could drive the results of an economic evaluation. Therefore, the choice as to which is used may be critical when making resource allocation decisions.     

Mapping EQ-5D-3L to EQ-5D-5L

ObjectivesThe original 3-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L) includes 5 dimensions with 3 levels of problems per dimension. Since 2010, a more sensitive version with 5 levels of problems per dimension (EQ-5D-5L) has become available. Population value sets have been developed for both versions of the questionnaire. The objective of this research was to develop a mapping function to link EQ-5D-3L responses to value sets for the EQ-5D-5L.MethodsVarious algorithms were developed to link EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L responses using data from an observational study including members of 10 subgroups (N = 3580) who completed both versions of the questionnaire. Nonparametric and ordinal logistic regression models were fit to the data and compared using Akaike’s information criterion (AIC) as well as the mean absolute error and root mean squared error of predictions. Results were contrasted qualitatively and quantitatively with those of an alternative copula-based approach.ResultsIncluding indicants of problems for other EQ-5D-3L dimensions as regressors in the modeling yielded the greatest improvement in prediction accuracy. Adding age and gender lowered the AIC without improving predictions, while including a latent factor lowered the AIC further and slightly improved predictive accuracy. Models that conditioned on problems in other EQ-5D-3L dimensions yielded more accurate predictions than the alternative copula-based approach in subgroups defined by age and gender.ConclusionWe present novel algorithms to map EQ-5D-3L responses to EQ-5D-5L value sets. The recommended approach is based on an ordinal logistic regression that disregards age and gender and accounts for unobserved heterogeneity using a latent factor.     

Comparison of the PROMIS Preference Score (PROPr) and EQ-5D-5L Index Value in General Population Samples in the United Kingdom,France, and Germany

ObjectivesThe Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Preference score (PROPr) can be used to assess health state utility (HSU) and estimate quality-adjusted life-years in cost-effectiveness analyses. It is based on item response theory and promises to overcome limitations of existing HSU scores such as ceiling effects. The PROPr contains 7 PROMIS domains: cognitive abilities, depression, fatigue, pain, physical function, sleep disturbance, and ability to participate in social roles and activities. We aimed to compare the PROPr with the 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) in terms of psychometric properties using data from 3 countries.MethodsWe collected PROMIS-29 profile and EQ-5D-5L data from 3 general population samples (United Kingdom = 1509, France = 1501, Germany = 1502). Given that cognition is not assessed by the PROMIS-29, it was predicted by the recommended linear regression model. We compared the convergent validity, known-groups construct validity, and ceiling and floor effects of the PROPr and EQ-5D-5L.ResultsThe mean PROPr (0.48, 0.53, 0.48; P<.01) and EQ-5D-5L scores (0.82, 0.85, 0.83; P<.01) showed significant differences of similar magnitudes (d = 0.34; d = 0.32; d = 0.35; P<.01) across all samples. The differences were invariant to sex, income, occupation, education, and most conditions but not for age. The Pearson correlation coefficients between both scores were r = 0.74, r = 0.69, and r = 0.72. PROPr’s ceiling and floor effects both were minor to moderate. The EQ-5D-5L’s ceiling (floor) effects were major (negligible).ConclusionsBoth the EQ-5D-5L and the PROPr assessed by the PROMIS-29 show high validity. The PROPr yields considerably lower HSU values than the EQ-5D-5L. Consequences for quality-adjusted life-year measurements should be investigated in future research.     

Comparing the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L descriptive systems and utilities in atopic dermatitis

Background

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common chronic inflammatory skin disorder affecting up to 10% of adults. The EQ-5D is the most commonly used generic preference-accompanied measure to generate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for economic evaluations.

Objectives

We aimed to compare psychometric properties of the three-level and five-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L) in adult patients with AD.

Methods

In a multicentre cross-sectional study, 218 AD patients with a broad range of severity completed the EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and Skindex-16. Disease severity outcomes included the Investigator Global Assessment, Eczema Area and Severity Index and the objective SCORing Atopic Dermatitis.

Results

A good agreement was established between the two EQ-5D versions with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.815 (95% CI 0.758–0.859, p < 0.001). Overall, 33 different health state profiles occurred in the EQ-5D-3L and 84 in the EQ-5D-5L. Compared to the EQ-5D-3L, ceiling effect was reduced for the mobility, self-care, usual activities and pain/discomfort dimensions by 4.6–11.5%. EQ-5D-5L showed higher average relative informativity (Shannon’s evenness index: 0.64 vs. 0.59). EQ-5D-5L demonstrated better convergent validity with EQ VAS, DLQI and Skindex-16. The two measures were similar in distinguishing between groups of patients based on disease severity and skin-specific quality of life with a moderate or large effect size (η² = 0.083–0.489).

Conclusion

Both instruments exhibited good psychometric properties in AD; however, the EQ-5D-5L was superior in terms of ceiling effects, informativity and convergent validity. We recommend the use of the EQ-5D-5L to measure health outcomes in clinical settings and for QALY calculations in AD.

     

Mapping World Health Organization Quality of Life–BREF Onto 5-Level EQ-5D in Thai Patients With Chronic Diseases

ObjectivesThis study aimed to map the World Health Organization Quality of Life–BREF (WHOQOL-BREF) onto the 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) using a real Thai valuation set of the EQ-5D-5L. The second objective was to explore the impacts of the differences between observed and predicted EQ-5D-5L index scores on the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) using 5 hypothetical scenarios.MethodsThis is a secondary data analysis. A total of 800 outpatients with chronic diseases were recruited from 2 university hospitals in Bangkok, Thailand, between July 2014 and March 2015. The 800 patients were randomly divided into 2 samples: estimation and validation samples. The estimation sample was used to assess the relationships between the EQ-5D-5L index score and 4 WHOQOL-BREF dimension scores and to find the best-fit model and its equation. For the validation sample, the equation of the best-fit model from the estimation sample was used to calculate predicted EQ-5D-5L index scores.ResultsA multiple linear regression showed that only the physical domain of the WHOQOL-BREF was significantly associated with the EQ-5D-5L. Among 11 regression models, the curve estimation found that the inverse model was the best-fit model. The prediction equation of EQ-5D-5L was equal to 1.385 minus 7.572/physical domain of the WHOQOL-BREF. The impacts of the differences between the observed and predicted EQ-5D-5L index scores on ICUR were only 0.4% to 1.8% from the base case.ConclusionsA nonlinear relationship between the physical domain of the WHOQOL-BREF and EQ-5D-5L utility was shown. The impacts of the differences between the observed and predicted EQ-5D-5L index scores on ICUR were minimal.     

Feasibility and validity of EQ-5D-5L proxy by nurses in measuring health-related quality of life of nursing home residents

Objective

Our study examined the feasibility and validity of the EQ-5D-5L proxy questionnaire in measuring health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of nursing home residents.

Methods

Twenty-four nurses and 229 residents from 3 nursing homes in Singapore participated in this cross-sectional study. Nurses assessed residents under their care with the EQ-5D-5L proxy questionnaire. Two experienced mappers conducted Dementia Care Mapping (DCM) within 1 month in a subsample of the residents. Feasibility was evaluated according to percentage of unanswered EQ-5D-5L items and proportion of nurses who failed to respond to all items. Convergent validity was assessed by examining the correlation between EQ-5D-5L measures and DCM scores. Known-groups validity was assessed by comparing differences in EQ-5D-5L scores for residents with varying communication abilities and physical functions.

Results

The nurses’ mean age was 35.4 years while the residents’ was 73.4 years. Most residents were female (51.3%) and had the ability to communicate (81.3%). For 6 of the 229 residents (2.6%), not all items in the EQ-5D-5L were completed. The EQ-5D-5L index score correlated positively and moderately with the DCM’s well/ill-being score (r?=?0.433, n?=?90, P?<?0.01). Residents who were able to communicate effectively or had better physical function were assessed to have less severe health problems and better EQ-5D-5L scores.

Conclusion

The EQ-5D-5L proxy questionnaire has adequate feasibility and validity when used by nurses to assess the HRQoL of nursing home residents. As it is brief and can be conveniently administered, it can be deployed on a larger scale to assess HRQoL of nursing home residents.

     

Response Mapping Methods to Estimate the EQ-5D-5L From the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis in Patients With Hip or Knee Osteoarthritis

ObjectivesThe mapping technique can estimate generic preference-based measure scores through a specific measure that cannot be used in economic evaluations. This study compared 2 response mapping methods to estimate EQ-5D-5L scores using the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC).MethodsThe sample consisted of 758 patients with the hip or knee osteoarthritis recruited in baseline. Bayesian networks (BN) and multinomial logistic regression (ML) were used as response mapping models. Predictions were obtained using the 6-month follow-up as a validation sample. The mean absolute error, mean squared error, deviation from the root mean squared error and intraclass correlation coefficient were calculated as precision measures.ResultsThere was 5.5% of missing data, which was removed. The mean age was 69.6 years (standard deviation = 10.5), with 61.6% of women. The BN model presented lower mean absolute error, mean squared error, root mean squared error and higher intraclass correlation coefficient than the ML model. Only the WOMAC items pain and physical function items were related with the EQ-5D-5L dimensions.ConclusionBN response mapping models are more robust methods, with better prediction results, than ML models. The BN model also provided a graphic representation of the dependency relationships between the EQ-5D-5L dimensions and the different WOMAC items that could be useful in the clinical investigation of patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis.     

Normative Estimates and Agreement Between 2 Measures of Health-Related Quality of Life in Older People With Frailty: Findings From the Community Ageing Research 75+ Cohort

BackgroundPrevious studies have summarized evidence on health-related quality of life for older people, identifying a range of measures that have been validated, but have not sought to present results by degree of frailty. Furthermore, previous studies did not typically use quality-of-life measures that generate an overall health utility score. Health utility scores are a necessary component of quality-adjusted life-year calculations used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of interventions.MethodsWe calculated normative estimates in mean and standard deviation for EQ-5D-5L, short-form 36-item health questionnaire in frailty (SF-36), and short-form 6-dimension (SF-6D) for a range of established frailty models. We compared response distributions across dimensions of the measures and investigated agreement using Bland-Altman and interclass correlation techniques.ResultsThe EQ-5D-5L, SF-36, and SF-6D scores decrease and their variability increases with advancing frailty. There is strong agreement between the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D across the spectrum of frailty. Agreement is lower for people who are most frail, indicating that different components of the 2 instruments may have greater relevance for people with advancing frailty in later life. There is a greater risk of ceiling effects using the EQ-5D-5L rather than the SF-6D.ConclusionsWe recommend the SF-36/SF-6D as an appropriate measure of health-related quality of life for clinical trials if fit older people are the planned target. In trials of interventions involving older people with increasing frailty, we recommend that both the EQ-5D-5L and SF36/SF6D are included, and are used in sensitivity analyses as part of cost-effectiveness evaluation.     

Comparing Measurement Properties of the EQ-5D-3L,ICECAP-O,and ASCOT in Frail Older Adults

BackgroundThe ICEpop CAPability measure for Older people (ICECAP-O) and the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) are preference-based measures for assessing quality of life (QOL) from a broader perspective than do traditional health-related QOL measures such as the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D). Measurement properties of these instruments have not yet been directly compared.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare the test-retest reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness of the three-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L), ICECAP-O, and ASCOT in frail older adults living at home.MethodsCross-sectional data and longitudinal data were used. Parameters for reliability (the intraclass correlation coefficient) and agreement (standard error of measurement) were used to assess test-retest reliability after 1 week. We formulated hypotheses about correlations with other measures and tested these to assess construct validity and responsiveness (longitudinal validity).ResultsThe reliability parameters for all three scales were considered good (intraclass correlation coefficient values above 0.70). Standard error of measurement values were less than 10% of the scale. Hypotheses regarding construct validity were in general accepted; the EQ-5D-3L was more strongly associated with physical limitations than were ICECAP-O and ASCOT and less strongly with instruments measuring aspects beyond health. Longitudinally, as hypothesized, mental health was most strongly associated with ICECAP-O, and self-perceived QOL, mastery, and client-centeredness of home care most strongly with ASCOT.ConclusionsOur findings support the adoption of ICECAP-O and ASCOT as outcome measures in economic evaluations of care interventions for older adults that have a broader aim than health-related QOL because they are at least as reliable as the EQ-5D-3L and are associated with aspects of QOL broader than health.     

Comparing EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L performance in common cancers: suggestions for instrument choosing

Purpose

To compare the performance of three-level EuroQol five-dimensions (EQ-5D-3L) and five-level EuroQol five-dimensions (EQ-5D-5L) among common cancer patients in urban China.

Methods

A hospital-based cross-sectional survey was conducted in three provinces from 2016 to 2018 in urban China. Patients with breast cancer, colorectal cancer, or lung cancer were recruited to complete the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. Response distribution, discriminatory power (indicator: Shannon index [H′] and Shannon evenness index [J′]), ceiling effect (the proportion of full health state), convergent validity, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were compared between the two instruments.

Results

A total of 1802 cancer patients (breast cancer: 601, colorectal cancer: 601, lung cancer: 600) were included, with the mean age of 55.6 years. The average inconsistency rate was 4.4%. Compared with EQ-5D-3L (average: H′?=?1.100, J′?=?0.696), an improved discriminatory power was observed in EQ-5D-5L (H′?=?1.473, J′?=?0.932), especially contributing to anxiety/depression dimensions. The ceiling effect was diminished in EQ-5D-5L (26.5%) in comparison with EQ-5D-3L (34.5%) (p?<?0.001), mainly reflected in the pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression dimensions. The overall utility score was 0.790 (95% CI 0.778–0.801) for EQ-5D-3L and 0.803 (0.790–0.816) for EQ-5D-5L (p?<?0.001). A similar pattern was also observed in the detailed cancer-specific analysis.

Conclusions

With greater discriminatory power, convergent validity and lower ceiling, EQ-5D-5L may be preferable to EQ-5D-3L for the assessment of HRQoL among cancer patients. However, higher utility scores derived form EQ-5D-5L may also lead to lower QALY gains than those of 3L potentially in cost-utility studies and underestimation in the burden of disease.