Comparison of EuroQol-5D and short form-6D utility scores in multiethnic Asian patients with psoriatic arthritis: A cross-sectional study

Journal of Rheumatology

Volumn 40, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 859-865

  Leung, Ying Ying ^a,c   Png, May Ee ^a   Wee, Hwee Lin ^b   Thumboo, Julian ^a,c  

^a SINGAPORE GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Singapore)

^b NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

^c Singapore Graduate Medical School   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Comparative study; Cost benefit; Psoriatic arthritis; Quality adjusted life year

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASIAN; CHINESE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DISCRIMINANT VALIDITY; EUROQOL 5D; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; INDIAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALAY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCORING SYSTEM; SHORT FORM 6D;

COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST BENEFIT; PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE-YEAR;

ADULT; AGED; ARTHRITIS, PSORIATIC; ASIAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84878646879     PISSN: 0315162X     EISSN: 14992752     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.120782     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 1997;35:1095-108.
2. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002;21:271-92.
3. Kopec JA, Willison KD. A comparative review of four preference-weighted measures of health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:317-25.
4. Brazier J, Roberts J, Tsuchiya A, Busschbach J. A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Econ 2004;13:873-84.
5. Conner-Spady B, Suarez-Almazor ME. Variation in the estimation of quality-adjusted life-years by different preference-based instruments. Med Care 2003;41:791-801.
6. Gerard K, Nicholson T, Mullee M, Mehta R, Roderick P. EQ-5D versus SF-6D in an older, chronically ill patient group. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2004;3:91-102.
7. Marra CA, Woolcott JC, Kopec JA, Shojania K, Offer R, Brazier JE, et al. A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis. Soc Sci Med 2005;60:1571-82.
8. Boonen A, van der Heijde D, Landewé R. How do the EQ-5D, SF-6D and the well-being rating scale compare in patients with ankylosing spondylitis? Ann Rheum Dis 2007;66:771-7.
9. Adams R, Walsh C, Veale D, Bresnihan B, FitzGerald O, Barry M. Understanding the relationship between the EQ-5D, SF-6D, HAQ and disease activity in inflammatory arthritis. Pharmacoeconomics 2010;28:477-87.
10. Husted JA, Gladman DD, Farewell VT, Long JA, Cook RJ. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire in patients with psoriatic arthritis. J Rheumatol 1997;24:511-7.
11. Leung YY, Ho KW, Zhu TY, Tam LS, Kun EW, Li EK. Testing scaling assumptions, reliability and validity of Medical Outcomes Study Short-form 36 health survey in psoriatic arthritis. Rheumatology 2010;49:1495-501.
12. Leung YY, Tam LS, Kun EW, Ho KW, Li EK. Comparison of 4 functional indexes in psoriatic arthritis with axial or peripheral disease subgroups using Rasch analyses. J Rheumatol 2008;35:1613-21.
13. Boers M, Brooks P, Strand CV, Tugwell P. The OMERACT filter for Outcome Measures in Rheumatology. J Rheumatol 1998;25:198-9.
14. Taylor W, Gladman D, Helliwell P, Marchesoni A, Mease P, Mielants H, et al. Classification criteria for psoriatic arthritis: Development of new criteria from a large international study. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54:2665-73.
15. The PRET project: Preparation for the re-valuation of the EQ-5D tariff. Sheffield: The University of Sheffield; 2011. (Internet. Accessed January 25, 2013.) Available from: http://www.shef.ac.uk/scharr/sections/heds/mvh/pret
16. Luo N, Chew LH, Fong KY, Koh DR, Ng SC, Yoon KH, et al. Validity and reliability of the EQ-5D self-report questionnaire in Chinese-speaking patients with rheumatic diseases in Singapore. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2003;32:685-90.
17. Luo N, Chew LH, Fong KY, Koh DR, Ng SC, Yoon KH, et al. Validity and reliability of the EQ-5D self-report questionnaire in English-speaking Asian patients with rheumatic diseases in Singapore. Qual Life Res 2003;12:87-92.
18. Luo N, Chew LH, Fong KY, Koh DR, Ng SC, Yoon KH, et al. Do English and Chinese EQ-5D versions demonstrate measurement equivalence? An exploratory study. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003;1:7.
19. Bansback NJ, Ara R, Barkham N, Brennan A, Fraser AD, Conway P, et al. Estimating the cost and health status consequences of treatment with TNF antagonists in patients with psoriatic arthritis. Rheumatology 2006;45:1029-38.
20. Strand V, Sharp V, Koenig AS, Park G, Shi Y, Wang B, et al. Comparison of health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis and effects of etanercept treatment. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:1143-50.
21. Saad A, Ashcroft DM, Watson KD, Symmons DP, Noyce PR, Hyrich KL, on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register. Improvements in quality of life and functional status in patients with psoriatic arthritis receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor therapies. Arthritis Care Res 2010;62:345-53.
22. Wee HL, Cheung YB, Fong KY, Luo N, Machin D, Thumboo J. Are English- and Chinese-language versions of the SF-6D equivalent? A comparison from a population-based study. Clin Ther 2004;26:1137-48.
23. Veenhof C, Bijlsma JW, van den Ende CH, van Dijk GM, Pisters MF, Dekker J. Psychometric evaluation of osteoarthritis questionnaires: A systematic review of the literature. Arthritis Rheum 2006;55:480-92.
24. Barton GR, Sach TH, Avery AJ, Jenkinson C, Doherty M, Whynes DK, et al. A comparison of the performance of the EQ-5D and SF-6D for individuals aged > or = 45 years. Health Econ 2008;17:815-32.
25. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307-10.
26. Fayers PM, Machin D. Quality of life: The assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.; 2007.
27. Cohen J. Statistical power for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
28. Petrou S, Hockley C. An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in general population. Health Econ 2005;14:1169-89.
29. Walters SJ, Brazier JE. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res 2005;14:1523-32.
30. Gaujoux-Viala C, Rat AC, Guillemin F, Flipo RM, Fardellone P, Bourgeois P, et al. Comparison of the EQ-5D and the SF-6D utility measures in 813 patients with early arthritis: Results from the ESPOIR cohort. J Rheumatol 2011;38:1576-84.
31. Gaujoux-Viala C, Rat AC, Guillemin F, Flipo RM, Fardellone P, Bourgeois P, et al. Responsiveness of EQ-5D and SF-6D in patients with early arthritis: Results from the ESPOIR cohort. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:1478-83.
32. Seymour J, McNamee P, Scott A, Tinelli M. Shedding new light onto the ceiling and floor? A quantile regression approach to compare EQ-5D and SF-6D responses. Health Econ 2010;19:683-96.
33. Marra CA, Marion SA, Guh DP, Najafzadeh M, Wolfe F, Esdaile JM, et al. Not all "quality-adjusted life years" are equal. J Clin Epidemiol 2007;60:616.
34. Patrick DL, Starks HE, Cain KC, Uhlmann RF, Pearlman RA. Measuring preferences for health states worse than death. Med Decis Making 1994;14:9-18.
35. Adams R, Craig BM, Walsh CD. The impact of a revised EQ-5D population scoring on preference-based utility scores in an inflammatory arthritis cohort. Value Health 2011;14:921-7.
36. Craig BM, Busschbach JJ. Toward a more universal approach in health valuation. Health Econ 2011;20:864-75.
37. Conner-Spady B, Suarez-Almazor ME. Variation in the estimation of quality-adjusted life-years by different preference-based instruments. Med Care 2003;41:791-801.
38. Wee HL, Machin D, Loke WC, Li SC, Cheung YB, Luo N, et al. Assessing differences in utility scores: A comparison of four widely used preference-based instruments. Value Health 2007;10:256-65.
39. Bryan S, Longworth L. Measuring health-related utility: Why the disparity between EQ-5D and SF-6D? Eur J Health Econ 2005;6:253-60.
40. Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Day NA. A comparison of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) with four other generic utility instruments. Ann Med 2001;33:358-70.
41. Parkin D, Devlin N. Is there a case for using visual analogue scale valuations in cost-utility analysis? Health Econ 2006;15:653-64.
42. Helliwell PS, Fitzgerald O, Strand CV, Mease PJ. Composite measures in psoriatic arthritis: A report from the GRAPPA 2009 annual meeting. J Rheumatol 2011;38:540-5.
43. Coates LC, Mumtaz A, Helliwell PS, Mease PJ, Callis Duffin K, Krueger GG, et al. Development of a disease severity and responder index for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) - Report of the OMERACT 10 PsA Special Interest Group. J Rheumatol 2011;38:1496-501.
44. Cauli A, Gladman DD, Mathieu A, Olivieri I, Porru G, Tak PP, et al. Patient global assessment in psoriatic arthritis: A multicenter GRAPPA and OMERACT study. J Rheumatol 2011;38:898-903.
45. Leung YY, Ho KW, Zhu TY, Tam LS, Kun EW, Li EK. Construct validity of the modified numeric rating scale of patient global assessment in psoriatic arthritis. J Rheumatol 2012;39:844-8.