Comparison between different health state utility instruments in patients with fibromyalgia.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Cost-utility analysis uses utility indexes to assess treatment effects. Some discrepancies between different utility indexes instruments are suggested and need to be identified in health conditions not yet investigated.Objective
To compare different utility indexes instruments in Brazilian patients with fibromyalgia and identify variables associated with these instruments.Methods
Impact of fibromyalgia (Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire [FIQ]) and utility indexes (Short-Form 6 Dimensions [SF-6D], EuroQol 5 Dimensions [EQ-5D], and EuroQol - Visual Analogue Scale [EQ-VAS]) were assessed in 97 patients with fibromyalgia at baseline, 8-week (after an exercise-based intervention), and 6- and 12-month follow-up. Construct validity and responsiveness of the utility indexes instruments were compared. Multiple regression models were used to verify the variables associated with the utility indexes instruments.Results
Construct validity analysis showed that FIQ presented moderate correlation with the SF-6D, the EQ-5D, and the EQ-VAS (r=-0.43, -0.41, -0.30, respectively, all p < .01). There was a moderate correlation between the SF-6D and the EQ-5D (r = 0.51, p < .001), moderate correlation between the SF-6D and the EQ-VAS (r = 0.41, p < .001), and no correlation between the EQ-VAS and the EQ-5D. The EQ-5D was responsive at the 8-week and 6-month follow-up, the SF-6D was responsive only at 6-month follow-up and the EQ-VAS was not responsive. The FIQ was associated with the EQ-5D and the SF-6D indexes, and symptom duration and depression with the EQ-VAS index.Conclusion
The EQ-5D better assessed the clinical change in patients with fibromyalgia. Furthermore, impact of fibromyalgia, symptom duration, and depression seem to be associated with the utility indexes.
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8536847 | BioStudies |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies
Similar Datasets
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Evidence of health utility changes in patients who suffer from longstanding health complaints attributed to dental amalgam fillings are limited. The change in health utility outcomes enables calculating quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and facilitates the comparison with other health conditions. The purpose of this study was to estimate the validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D utilities following removal of dental amalgam fillings in patients with health complaints attributed to their amalgam fillings, and examine the ability of these instruments to detect minimally important changes over time.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms, which they attributed to dental amalgam restorations, were recruited to a prospective cohort study in Norway. Two health state utility instruments, EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D, as well as self-reported general health complaints (GHC-index) and visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) were administered to all patients (n = 32) at baseline and at follow-up. The last two were used as criteria measures. Concurrent and predictive validities were examined using correlation coefficients. Responsiveness was assessed by the effect size (ES), standardized response mean (SRM), and relative efficiency. Minimally important change (MIC) was examined by distribution and anchor-based approaches.<h4>Results</h4>Concurrent validity of the EQ-5D-5L was similar to that of SF-6D utility. EQ-5D-5L was more responsive than SF-6D: the ES were 0.73 and 0.58 for EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D, respectively; SRM were 0.76 and 0.67, respectively. EQ-5D-5L was more efficient than SF-6D in detecting changes, but both were less efficient compared to criteria-based measures. The estimated MIC of EQ-5D-5L value set was 0.108 and 0.118 based on distribution and anchor-based approaches, respectively. The corresponding values for SF-6D were 0.048 and 0.064, respectively.<h4>Conclusions</h4>In patients with health complaints attributed to dental amalgam undergoing amalgam removal, both EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D showed reasonable concurrent and predictive validity and acceptable responsiveness. The EQ-5D-5L utility appears to be more responsive compared to SF-6D. Trial registration The research was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov., NCT01682278. Registered 10 September 2012, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01682278 .
| S-EPMC8052827 | BioStudies
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>The SF-6D and EQ-5D are widely used generic index measures as health-related quality of life. We assessed within-subject agreement between SF-6D and EQ-5D utilities with different preference weights, and their validities in measuring Chinese rural residents, before and after standardization scores.<h4>Methodology/principal findings</h4>Rural residents over 18 years old were interviewed using EQ-5D and SF-6D in Jiangsu Province, China. EQ-5D utility-scoring algorithms were used from three conversion tables from the United Kingdom, Japan, and the United States. Validities, Sensitivity and agreement between instruments were computed and compared. Factors affecting utility difference were explored with multiple liner regression models. Scores with standardization intervals of 0-1 in the two instruments were analyzed by the use of the above methods again. In 929 respondents, relative efficiency statistic and receiver operating characteristic curves analysis showed SF-6D to be the more efficient, followed by the EQ-5D model in Japan weights. Bland-Altman plot analysis showed paired SF-6D/EQ-5D in UK weights had better agreement. Though some risk factors were found, multiple liner regression demonstrated most coefficients were weaker than 0.2, and all R(2) values were less than 0.06. Standardization did not significantly influence these results except scores' value.<h4>Conclusions/significance</h4>SF-6D and next EQ-5D in Japan weights could be used for Chinese rural residents. Further research with larger sample size of population is needed to establish and determine the feasibility of standardization score.
| S-EPMC3407238 | BioStudies
Project description:<h4>Background and objective</h4>Healthcare interventions that improve the health of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have the potential to affect the health of caregivers. This study compares the three-level EuroQoL-5 Dimension (EQ-5D-3L) and the Short Form-6 Dimension (SF-6D) in their ability to value such spillover effects in caregivers.<h4>Methods</h4>Clinical data collected from two Autism Treatment Network (ATN) sites was combined with survey data of caregivers of children diagnosed with ASD. Caregivers completed instruments by proxy describing child health and completed the EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D preference-weighted instruments to describe their own health.<h4>Results</h4>There was a strong correlation between the health utility scores of the two preference-weighted instruments (??=?0.6172, p?<?0.001) measuring caregiver health-related quality of life. There was a similar correlation between both the SF-6D and EQ-5D-3L scores with a previously validated care-related quality of life measure (Care-related Quality of Life instrument [CarerQol-7D]) (??=?0.569, p?<?0.001 and ??=?0.541, p?<?0.001, respectively). The mean SF-6D scores for caregivers differed significantly in relation to four of the five child health or behavior measures whereas the EQ-5D-3L differed for only two of them.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Health utility values of caregivers for children with ASD vary by the health characteristics of the child, suggesting significant potential for spillover effects. The comparison of the EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D demonstrated that both instruments can be used to estimate spillover effects of interventions to improve child health, but the SF-6D exhibited greater sensitivity to child health among children with ASD.
| S-EPMC6469595 | BioStudies
Project description:OBJECTIVES: To compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) between patients with stable angina and the general population in China and to examine factors associated with HRQoL among patients with stable angina. METHODS: A cross-sectional HRQoL survey of stable angina patients recruited from 4 hospitals (n = 411) and the general population recruited from 3 Physical Examination Centers (n = 549) was conducted from July to December, 2011 in two large cities, Tianjin and Chengdu. HRQoL was assessed using the EQ-5D, EQ-VAS, and SF-6D instruments. The health status specific to patients with stable angina was assessed using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ). Information on socio-demographic, clinical, and lifestyle factors were also collected. Nested regressions were performed to explore how these factors were associated with HRQoL in patients with stable angina. RESULTS: Compared with the general population (44.2 ± 10 years, 49.9% females), stable angina patients (68.1 ± 12 years, 50.4% females) had significantly lower HRQoL scores in EQ-5D utility index (0.75 ± 0.19 vs. 0.90 ± 0.20, p<0.05), SF-6D utility index (0.68 ± 0.12 vs. 0.85 ± 0.11, p<0.05), and EQ-VAS (71.2 ± 12.3 vs. 83.9 ± 10.9, p<0.05). The differences remained (-0.05 for EQ-5D, -9.27 for EQ-VAS and -0.13 for SF-6D) after controlling for socio-economic characteristics. SAQ scores showed that stable angina patients experienced impaired disease-specific health status, especially in angina stability (40.5 ± 34.6). Nested regressions indicated stable angina-specific health status explained most of the variation in HRQoL, among which disease perception, physical limitation, and angina stability were the strongest predictors. More physical exercise and better sleep were positively related with HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the general population, stable angina patients were associated with lower HRQoL and lower health utility scores, which were largely impacted by clinical symptoms. Further studies are needed to characterize the influence of geographic and cultural factors on the variations of health-related utility in stable angina patients.
2014-01-01 | S-EPMC4026133 | BioStudies
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>This study aimed to assess the validity of the EQ-5D-5L in respondents with self-reported diabetes coming from a representative general population survey.<h4>Methods</h4>2974 respondents from the general adult population of Poland, chosen with multi-stage random sampling, were surveyed with HRQoL instruments (EQ-5D-5L, EQ VAS, SF-12, EQ-5D-3L) and a screening question about diabetes. To obtain EQ-5D index values, we used country-specific Polish value sets. We compared the instruments in terms of the ceiling effect, discriminatory power and frequency of individual health states. We evaluated construct validity in terms of known-groups validity and convergent validity of EQ-5D-5L dimensions and index values with other HRQoL measures.<h4>Results</h4>In respondents with diabetes (n = 247), the percentage reporting 'no problems' with EQ-5D-3L was reduced by 34.5% with the use of EQ-5D-5L (from 14.2% to 9.3%, respectively). A significant improvement in informativity was noticed in mobility and pain/discomfort dimensions (a relative increase of 23.1% and 22.7%, respectively). Known-groups construct validity analysis confirmed prior hypotheses-index scores were higher in the following groups: younger respondents, males, those taking no medication or oral antidiabetic drugs, and respondents with higher levels of education. The convergence between related EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L or SF-6D dimensions was stronger than between unrelated dimensions. The Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference between EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L, SF-6D, EQ VAS/100 index scores of 0.047, 0.165 and 0.231 respectively.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Our results support the validity of the EQ-5D-5L descriptive system and EQ-5D-5L index, based on the directly measured value set in respondents with self-reported diabetes coming from the general population.
| S-EPMC8097836 | BioStudies
Project description:Assessments of health-related quality of life and particularly utility values are important components of health economic analyses. Several instruments have been developed to measure utilities. However no consensus has emerged regarding the most appropriate instrument within a therapeutic area such as chronic pain. The study compared two instruments - EQ-5D and SF-6D - for their performance and validity in patients with chronic pain.Pooled data from three randomised, controlled clinical trials with two active treatment groups were used. The included patients suffered from osteoarthritis knee pain or low back pain. Differences between the utility measures were compared in terms of mean values at baseline and endpoint, Bland-Altman analysis, correlation between the dimensions, construct validity, and responsiveness.The analysis included 1977 patients, most with severe pain on the Numeric Rating Scale. The EQ-5D showed a greater mean change from baseline to endpoint compared with the SF-6D (0.43 to 0.58 versus 0.59 to 0.64). Bland-Altman analysis suggested the difference between two measures depended on the health status of a patient. Spearmans rank correlation showed moderate correlation between EQ-5D and SF-6D dimensions. Construct validity showed both instruments could differentiate between patient subgroups with different severities of adverse events and analgesic efficacies but larger differences were detected with the EQ-5D. Similarly, when anchoring the measures to a disease-specific questionnaire - Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) - both questionnaires could differentiate between WOMAC severity levels but the EQ-5D showed greater differences. Responsiveness was also higher with the EQ-5D and for the subgroups in which improvements in health status were expected or when WOMAC severity level was reduced the improvements with EQ-5D were higher than with SF-6D.This analysis showed that the mean EQ-5D scores were lower than mean SF-6D scores in patients with chronic pain. EQ-5D seemed to have higher construct validity and responsiveness in these patients.
| S-EPMC3722016 | BioStudies
Project description:OBJECTIVES:The aim of this study was to compare utility weights of EuroQoL-five-dimension-3 levels (EQ-5D-3L) and Short-Form six-dimension (SF-6D) in a representative cohort of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). A cost-utility analysis (CUA) is designed to report the change to costs required to achieve an estimated change to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The quality component of a QALY is measured by utility. Utility represents the preference of general population for a given health state. Classification systems of the multi-attribute utility instruments (MAUIs) are used to define these health states. Utility weights developed from different classification systems can vary and may affect the conclusions from CUAs. DESIGN:A community-based cross-sectional study. SETTING:Anuradhapura, a rural district in Sri Lanka. PARTICIPANTS:A representative sample of 1096 patients with CKD, selected using the population-based CKD register, completed the EQ-5D-3L and SF-36. SF-6D was constructed from the SF-36 according to the published algorithm. The study assessed discrimination, correlation and differences across the two instruments. RESULTS:Study participants were predominantly male (62.6%). Mean EQ-5D-3L utility score was 0.540 (SD 0.35) compared with 0.534 (SD 0.09) for the SF-6D (p=0.588). The correlation (r) between the scores was 0.40 (p<0.001). Utility scores were significantly different in both males and females between the two tools, but there was no difference in age and educational categories. Both MAUI scores were significantly lower (p<0.001) among those who were in more advanced stages of the disease and the corresponding utility scores of the two instruments in different CKD stages were also significantly different (p<0.05). The largest effect size was seen among the patients on dialysis. CONCLUSIONS:The correlation between the scores was moderate. SF-6D had the lowest floor and ceiling effect and was better at detecting different stages of the disease. Thus, based on the evidence presented in this study, SF-6D appears to be more appropriate to be used among patients with CKD.
2019-01-01 | S-EPMC6398797 | BioStudies
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>There is limited evidence of mapping clinical instruments to a generic preference-based instrument in Asian patient populations. The current study aims to map the eight-item Patient Health Questionnaire depression scale (PHQ-8) onto the EuroQol Five-Dimension (EQ-5D), the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) and the Short Form Six-Dimension (SF-6D) which helps to inform future cost-utility analyses of treatments for depression.<h4>Methods</h4>A total of 249 participants who had completed PHQ-8, EQ-5D, SF-6D and HUI3 questionnaires were included in the analyses. A beta regression mixture model was used to map the utility scores as a function of PHQ-8 total scores, PHQ-squared, age and gender. The predictive accuracy of the models was examined using mean absolute error and root mean square error.<h4>Results</h4>The results were compared against two common regression methods including Ordinary Least Square (OLS) and Tobit regression models. The mean age of the sample was 36.2 years (SD = 11.1). The mean EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, HUI3 and SF-6D utility scores were 0.615, 0.709, 0.461 and 0.607, respectively. The EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D utility scores were best predicted by the beta mixture regression model consisting of PHQ-8 total sores, PHQ-squared, and covariates including age and gender. The HUI3 was best predicted by the OLS regression model.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The current study provides important evidence to clinicians and researchers about the mapping algorithms that can be used in economic evaluation among patients with depression.
| S-EPMC8438835 | BioStudies
Project description:Many cost-utility analyses rely on generic utility measures for estimates of disease impact. Commonly used generic preference-based indexes may generate different absolute estimates of disease burden despite sharing anchors of dead at 0 and full health at 1.0.We compare the impact of 16 prevalent chronic health conditions using 6 utility-based indexes of health and a visual analog scale.Data were from the National Health Measurement Study (NHMS), a cross-sectional telephone survey of 3844 adults aged 35 to 89 years in the United States.The NHMS included the EuroQol-5D-3L, Health and Activities Limitation Index (HALex), Health Utilities Index Mark 2 (HUI2) and Mark 3 (HUI3), preference-based scoring for the SF-36v2 (SF-6D), Quality of Well-Being Scale, and visual analog scale. Respondents self-reported 16 chronic conditions. Survey-weighted regression analyses for each index with all health conditions, age, and sex were used to estimate health condition impact estimates in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) lost over 10 years. All analyses were stratified by ages 35 to 69 and 70 to 89 years.There were significant differences between the indexes for estimates of the absolute impact of most conditions. On average, condition impacts were the smallest with the SF-6D and EQ-5D-3L and the largest with the HALex and HUI3. Likewise, the estimated loss of QALYs varied across indexes. Condition impact estimates for EQ-5D-3L, HUI2, HUI3, and SF-6D generally had strong Spearman correlations across conditions (i.e., >0.69).This analysis uses cross-sectional data and lacks health condition severity information.Health condition impact estimates vary substantially across the indexes. These results imply that it is difficult to standardize results across cost-utility analyses that use different utility measures.
| S-EPMC4856155 | BioStudies
Project description:OBJECTIVES:This study aimed to evaluate the performance of EQ-5D data mapped from SF-12 in terms of estimating cost effectiveness in cost-utility analysis (CUA). The comparability of SF-6D (derived from SF-12) was also assessed. METHODS:Incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated based on two Markov models assessing the cost effectiveness of haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) using utility values based on EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D using three direct-mapping algorithms and two response-mapping algorithms (mEQ-5D), and SF-6D. Bootstrap method was used to estimate the 95% confidence interval (percentile method) of incremental QALYs and ICERs with 1000 replications for the utilities. RESULTS:In both models, compared to the observed EQ-5D values, mEQ-5D values expressed much lower incremental QALYs (range - 14.9 to - 33.2%) and much higher ICERs (range 17.5 to 49.7%). SF-6D also estimated lower incremental QALYs (- 29.0 and - 14.9%) and higher ICERs (40.9 and 17.5%) than did the observed EQ-5D. The 95% confidence interval of incremental QALYs and ICERs confirmed the lower incremental QALYs and higher ICERs estimated using mEQ-5D and SF-6D. CONCLUSION:Compared to observed EQ-5D, EQ-5D mapped from SF-12 and SF-6D would under-estimate the QALYs gained in cost-utility analysis and thus lead to higher ICERs. It would be more sensible to conduct CUA studies using directly collected EQ-5D data and to designate one single preference-based measure as reference case in a jurisdiction to achieve consistency in healthcare decision-making.
2019-01-01 | S-EPMC6394787 | BioStudies