Health-related quality of life assessment by the EuroQol-50 can provide cost-utility data in the field of low-back surgery

European Spine Journal

Volumn 14, Issue 10, 2005, Pages 1000-1007

  Solberg, Tore K ^a   Olsen, Jan Abel ^b   Ingebrigtsen, Tor ^a   Hofoss, Dag ^b,c   Nygaard, Øystein P ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF NORTH NORWAY   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TROMSØ   (Norway)

^c Health Services Research Unit   (Norway)

^d TRONDHEIM UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

Author keywords

EQ 5D; Health related quality of life; Lumbar spine; Responsiveness; Validity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DEGENERATIVE DISEASE; DISABILITY; EMPLOYMENT; EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; LUMBAR SPINE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MONITORING; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PATIENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RELIABILITY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; VALIDATION PROCESS; WALKING;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DISABILITY EVALUATION; EMPLOYMENT; HUMANS; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; ORTHOPEDIC PROCEDURES; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUALITY OF LIFE; SPINAL DISEASES;

EID: 29144436447     PISSN: 09406719     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-005-0898-2     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Badia X, Monserrat S, Roset M, Herdman M (1999) Feasibility, validity and test-retest reliability of scaling methods for health states: the visual analoaue scale and the time trade-off. Qual Life Res 8:303-310
2. Baker DJ, Pynsent PB, Fairbank CT (1990) The Oswestry Disability Index revisited: its reliability, repeatability and validity, and a comparison with the St Thomas's Disability Index. In: Roland M, Jenner JR (eds) Back Pain. New approaches to rehabilitation and education. Manchester University Press, Manchester, pp. 174-186
3. Beurskens AJ, Vet HC, Koke AJ (1996) Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: a comparison of different instruments. Pain 65:71-76
4. Brazier J, Deverill M, Green C, Harper R, Booth A (1999) A review of the use of health status measures in economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 3:1-164
5. Brooks R (1996) EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 37:53-72
6. Carmines EG, Zeller RA (1979) Reliability and validity assessment. Quantitiative applications in the social sciences. Sage University, Beverly Hills, paper 17, pp 1-71
7. Coons SJ, Rao S, Keininger DL, Hays RD (2000) A comparative review of generic quality-of-life instruments. Pharmacoeconomics 17:13-35
8. Cronbach LJ (1951) Co-efficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:297-334
9. Deyo RA, Centor RM (1986) Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chronic Dis 39:897-906
10. Diotine CE, Von Korff M, Koepsell TD, Deyo RA, Barlow WE, Checkoway H (1999) A comparison of pain, functional limitations, and work status indices as outcome measures in back pain research. Spine 24:2339-2345
11. Dolan P (1996) Modelling valuations for health states: the effect of duration. Health Policy 38:189-203
12. Dolan P (1997) Modelling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 35:1095-1108
13. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A (1996) The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Econ 5:141-154
14. Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O'Brien JP (1980) The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy 66:271-273
15. Garratt AM, Klaber MJ, Farrin AJ (2001) Responsiveness of generic and specific measures of health outcome in low back pain. Spine 26:71-77
16. Hagg O, Fritzell P, Romberg K, Nordwall A (2001) The general function score: a useful tool for measurement of physical disability. Validity and reliability. Eur Spine J 10:203-210
17. Katz JN, Larson MG, Phillips CB, Fossel AH, Liang MH (1992) Comparative measurement sensitivity of short and longer health status instruments. Med Care 30:917-925
18. Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF (1989) Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care 27:S178-S189
19. Malter AD, Weinstein J (1996) Cost-effectiveness of lumbar discectomy. Spine 21:69S-74S
20. Nord E (1991) EuroQol: health-related quality of life measurement. Valuations of health states by the general public in Norway. Health Policy 18:25-36
21. Patrick DL, Deyo RA (1989) Generic and disease-specific measures in assessing health status and quality of life. Med Care 27:S217-S232
22. Patrick DL, Deyo RA, Atlas SJ, Singer DE, Chapin A, Keller RB (1995) Assessing health-related quality of life in patients with sciatica. Spine 20:1899-1908
23. Rabin R, de Charro F (2001) EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med 33:337-343
24. Stromqvist B, Jonsson B, Fritzell P, Hagg O, Larsson BE, Lind B (2001) The Swedish National Register for lumbar spine surgery: Swedish society for spinal surgery. Acta Orthop Scand 72:99-106
25. Suarez-Almazor ME, Kendall C, Johnson JA, Skeith K, Vincent D (2000) Use of health status measures in patients with low back pain in clinical settings. Comparison of specific, generic and preference-based instruments. Rheumatology (Oxford) 39:783-790
26. Terwee CB, Dekker FW, Wiersinga WM, Prummel MF, Bossuyt PM (2003) On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation. Qual Life Res 12:349-362
27. The EuroQol Group (1990) EuroQol-a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQol Group. Health Policy 16:199-208
28. Weber H (1983) Lumbar disc herniation. A controlled, prospective study with ten years of observation. Spine 8:131-140
29. Wood-Dauphinee SL (2001) Assessment of back-related quality of life: the continuing challenge. Spine 26:857-861