Comparison of the preference-based EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD)

European Journal of Health Economics

Volumn 16, Issue 9, 2015, Pages 1019-1026

  Yang, Fan ^a   Lau, Titus ^b   Lee, Evan ^b   Vathsala, A ^b   Chia, Kee Seng ^a   Luo, Nan ^a  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

^b NATIONAL UNIVERSITY HEALTH SYSTEM   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Discriminative ability; EQ 5D 5L; ESRD; SF 6D

Indexed keywords

HEMOGLOBIN;

3 LEVEL EUROQOL GROUP 5 DIMENSION QUESTIONNAIRE; ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSESSMENT OF HUMANS; CHARLSON COMORBIDITY INDEX; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; END STAGE RENAL DISEASE; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HEMODIALYSIS; HEMOGLOBIN BLOOD LEVEL; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERITONEAL DIALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; SHORT FORM 12; SHORT FORM 6 DIMENSION QUESTIONNAIRE; SINGAPORE; TERTIARY CARE CENTER; TREATMENT DURATION; CHRONIC KIDNEY FAILURE; INTERVIEW; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATIENT PREFERENCE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SOCIOECONOMICS; STANDARDS;

CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; KIDNEY FAILURE, CHRONIC; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PREFERENCE; QUALITY OF LIFE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SINGAPORE; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; TERTIARY CARE CENTERS;

EID: 84947489649     PISSN: 16187598     EISSN: 16187601     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10198-014-0664-7     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Dolan, P.: Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med. Care 35(11), 1095–1108 (1997)
2. Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Deverill, M.: The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J. Health Econ. 21(2), 271–292 (2002)
3. Conner-Spady, B., Suarez-Almazor, M.E.: Variation in the estimation of quality-adjusted life-years by different preference-based instruments. Med. Care 41(7), 791–801 (2003). doi:10.1097/01.MLR.0000068537.83456.36
4. Xie, F., Li, S.C., Luo, N., Lo, N.N., Yeo, S.J., Yang, K.Y., Fong, K.Y., Thumboo, J.: Comparison of the EuroQol and short form 6D in Singapore multiethnic Asian knee osteoarthritis patients scheduled for total knee replacement. Arthr. Rheum. 57(6), 1043–1049 (2007). doi:10.1002/art.22883
5. Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Tsuchiya, A., Busschbach, J.: A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Econ. 13(9), 873–884 (2004). doi:10.1002/hec.866
6. Cunillera, O., Tresserras, R., Rajmil, L., Vilagut, G., Brugulat, P., Herdman, M., Mompart, A., Medina, A., Pardo, Y., Alonso, J., Brazier, J., Ferrer, M.: Discriminative capacity of the EQ-5D, SF-6D, and SF-12 as measures of health status in population health survey. Qual. Life Res. 19(6), 853–864 (2010). doi:10.1007/s11136-010-9639-z
7. Petrou, S., Hockley, C.: An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population. Health Econ. 14(11), 1169–1189 (2005). doi:10.1002/hec.1006
8. Luo, N., Wang, P., Fu, A.Z., Johnson, J.A., Coons, S.J.: Preference-based SF-6D scores derived from the SF-36 and SF-12 have different discriminative power in a population health survey. Med. Care 50(7), 627–632 (2012). doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e31824d7471
9. Barton, G.R., Bankart, J., Davis, A.C., Summerfield, Q.A.: Comparing utility scores before and after hearing-aid provision: results according to the EQ-5D, HUI3 and SF-6D. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy 3(2), 103–105 (2004)
10. Longworth, L., Bryan, S.: An empirical comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D in liver transplant patients. Health Econ. 12(12), 1061–1067 (2003). doi:10.1002/hec.787
11. Lee, A.J., Morgan, C.L., Conway, P., Currie, C.J.: Characterisation and comparison of health-related quality of life for patients with renal failure. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 21(11), 1777–1783 (2005). doi:10.1185/030079905X65277
12. Manns, B.J., Johnson, J.A., Taub, K., Mortis, G., Ghali, W.A., Donaldson, C.: Dialysis adequacy and health related quality of life in hemodialysis patients. ASAIO J. 48(5), 565–569 (2002)
13. 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 3(2), 91–102 (2004)
14. Rajan, M., Lai, K.C., Tseng, C.L., Qian, S., Selim, A., Kazis, L., Pogach, L., Sinha, A.: Estimating utilities for chronic kidney disease, using SF-36 and SF-12-based measures: challenges in a population of veterans with diabetes. Qual. Life Res. 22(1), 53–64 (2013). doi:10.1007/s11136-012-0139-1
15. Janssen, M.F., Birnie, E., Bonsel, G.J.: Quantification of the level descriptors for the standard EQ-5D three-level system and a five-level version according to two methods. Qual. Life Res. 17(3), 463–473 (2008). doi:10.1007/s11136-008-9318-5
16. Janssen, M.F., Birnie, E., Haagsma, J.A., Bonsel, G.J.: Comparing the standard EQ-5D three-level system with a five-level version. Value Health 11(2), 275–284 (2008). doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00230.x
17. Sullivan, P.W., Ghushchyan, V.: Preference-based EQ-5D index scores for chronic conditions in the United States. Med. Decis. Mak 26(4), 410–420 (2006). doi:10.1177/0272989X06290495
18. Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., Janssen, M., Kind, P., Parkin, D., Bonsel, G., Badia, X.: Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual. Life Res. 20(10), 1727–1736 (2011). doi:10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x
19. Pickard, A.S., De Leon, M.C., Kohlmann, T., Cella, D., Rosenbloom, S.: Psychometric comparison of the standard EQ-5D to a 5 level version in cancer patients. Med. Care 45(3), 259–263 (2007). doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000254515.63841.81
20. Kim, S.H., Kim, H.J., Lee, S.I., Jo, M.W.: Comparing the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in cancer patients in Korea. Qual. Life Res. 21(6), 1065–1073 (2012). doi:10.1007/s11136-011-0018-1
21. Agborsangaya, C.B., Lahtinen, M., Cooke, T., Johnson, J.A.: Comparing the EQ-5D 3L and 5L: measurement properties and association with chronic conditions and multimorbidity in the general population. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 12, 74 (2014). doi:10.1186/1477-7525-12-74
22. Di Iorio, B., Cillo, N., Cirillo, M., De Santo, N.G.: Charlson Comorbidity Index is a predictor of outcomes in incident hemodialysis patients and correlates with phase angle and hospitalization. Int. J. Artif. Organs 27(4), 330–336 (2004)
23. Rabin, R., de Charro, F.: EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol group. Ann. Med. 33(5), 337–343 (2001). doi:10.3109/07853890109002087
24. Lee, C.F., Nan, L., Ng, R., Wong, N.S., Yap, Y.S., Lo, S.K., Chia, W.K., Yee, A., Krishna, L., Wong, C., Goh, C., Cheung, Y.B.: Comparison of the measurement properties between a short and generic instrument, the 5-level EuroQoL Group’s 5-dimension (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire, and a longer and disease-specific instrument, the Functional Assessment Of Cancer Therapy—Breast (FACT-B), in Asian breast cancer patients. Qual. Life Res. 22(7), 1745–1751 (2012)
25. Wong, K.Y., How, H.C., Thumboo J., Shen, L., Tay, E.G., Luo, N.: Testing the equivalence of the label wording for EQ-5D-5L responses options across different languages in Singapore. Paper presented at the ISPOR 5th Asia-Pacific conference, Taipei International Convention Center, Taipei, Taiwan, 2–4 Sept 2012
26. van Hout, B., Janssen, M.F., Feng, Y.S., Kohlmann, T., Busschbach, J., Golicki, D., Lloyd, A., Scalone, L., Kind, P., Pickard, A.S.: Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health 15(5), 708–715 (2012). doi:10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.008
27. Kalantar-Zadeh, K., Unruh, M.: Health related quality of life in patients with chronic kidney disease. Int. Urol. Nephrol. 37(2), 367–378 (2005). doi:10.1007/s11255-004-0012-4
28. Yang, F., Wang, V.W., Joshi, V.D., Lau, T.W., Luo, N.: Validation of the English version of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life questionnaire (KDQOL-36) in haemodialysis patients in Singapore. Patient 6(2), 135–141 (2013). doi:10.1007/s40271-013-0015-2
29. Brazier, J.E., Roberts, J.: The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Med. Care 42(9), 851–859 (2004)
30. Wee, H.L., Cheung, Y.B., Fong, K.Y., 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. 26(7), 1137–1148 (2004)
31. Bland, J.M., Altman, D.G.: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1(8476), 307–310 (1986)
32. Fayers, Peter M., M, D.: Quality of Life: The Assessment, Analysis and Interpretation of Patient-Reported Outcomes, 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, England (2007)
33. Luo, N., Johnson, J.A., Shaw, J.W., Feeny, D., Coons, S.J.: Self-reported health status of the general adult U.S. population as assessed by the EQ-5D and health utilities index. Med. Care 43(11), 1078–1086 (2005)
34. Molsted, S., Prescott, L., Heaf, J., Eidemak, I.: Assessment and clinical aspects of health-related quality of life in dialysis patients and patients with chronic kidney disease. Nephron. Clin. Pract. 106(1), C24–C33 (2007). doi:10.1159/000101481
35. Cohen, J.: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1988)
36. Hawthorne, G., Richardson, J., Day, N.A.: A comparison of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) with four other generic utility instruments. Ann. Med. 33(5), 358–370 (2001)
37. van Stel, H.F., Buskens, E.: Comparison of the SF-6D and the EQ-5D in patients with coronary heart disease. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 4, 20 (2006). doi:10.1186/1477-7525-4-20
38. Sorensen, J., Linde, L., Ostergaard, M., Hetland, M.L.: Quality-adjusted life expectancies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis—comparison of index scores from EQ-5D, 15D, and SF-6D. Value Health 15(2), 334–339 (2012). doi:10.1016/j.jval.2011.09.010
39. Obradovic, M., Lal, A., Liedgens, H.: Validity and responsiveness of EuroQol-5 dimension (EQ-5D) versus Short Form-6 dimension (SF-6D) questionnaire in chronic pain. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 11, 110 (2013). doi:10.1186/1477-7525-11-110
40. Barton, G.R., Sach, T.H., Avery, A.J., Doherty, M., Jenkinson, C., Muir, K.R.: Comparing the performance of the EQ-5D and SF-6D when measuring the benefits of alleviating knee pain. Cost Eff. Resour Alloc. 7, 12 (2009). doi:10.1186/1478-7547-7-12
41. 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 28(6), 477–487 (2010). doi:10.2165/11533010-000000000-00000
42. Sach, T.H., Barton, G.R., Jenkinson, C., Doherty, M., Avery, A.J., Muir, K.R.: Comparing cost-utility estimates: does the choice of EQ-5D or SF-6D matter? Med. Care 47(8), 889–894 (2009). doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181a39428
43. McDonough, C.M., Tosteson, A.N.: Measuring preferences for cost-utility analysis: how choice of method may influence decision-making. Pharmacoeconomics 25(2), 93–106 (2007)
44. Stavem, K., Froland, S.S., Hellum, K.B.: Comparison of preference-based utilities of the 15D, EQ-5D and SF-6D in patients with HIV/AIDS. Qual. Life Res. 14(4), 971–980 (2005)
45. Harrison, M.J., Davies, L.M., Bansback, N.J., McCoy, M.J., Verstappen, S.M., Watson, K., Symmons, D.P.: The comparative responsiveness of the EQ-5D and SF-6D to change in patients with inflammatory arthritis. Qual. Life Res. 18(9), 1195–1205 (2009). doi:10.1007/s11136-009-9539-2
46. EuroQolGroup. http://www.euroqol.org/about-eq-5d/valuation-of-eq-5d/eq-5d-5l-value-sets.html