Assessing the construct validity and responsiveness of Preference-Based Measures (PBMs) in cataract surgery patients

被引:8
|
作者
Breheny, Katie [1 ]
Hollingworth, William [1 ]
Kandiyali, Rebecca [1 ]
Dixon, Padraig [1 ]
Loose, Abi [2 ]
Craggs, Pippa [2 ]
Grzeda, Mariusz [2 ]
Sparrow, John [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bristol, Bristol Med Sch, Populat Hlth Sci, Bristol, Avon, England
[2] Bristol Eye Hosp, Dept Ophthalmol, Bristol, Avon, England
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Cataract; EQ-5D; ICECAP-O; Bolt-on; Responsiveness; Validity; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT; BOLT-ON; HEALTH; EQ-5D; QUESTIONNAIRE; UTILITY; PERFORMANCE; CAT-PROM5; EUROQOL;
D O I
10.1007/s11136-020-02443-3
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose The validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L in visual conditions has been questioned, inspiring development of a vision 'bolt-on' domain (EQ-5D-3L + VIS). Developments in preference-based measures (PBM) also includes the EQ-5D-5L and the ICECAP-O capability wellbeing measure. This study aimed to examine the construct validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-3L + VIS and ICECAP-O in cataract surgery patients for the first time, to inform choice of PBM for economic evaluation in this population. Methods The analyses used data from the UK Predict-CAT cataract surgery cohort study. PBMs and the Cat-PROM5 [a validated measure of cataract quality of life (QOL)] were completed before surgery and 4-8 weeks after. Construct validity was assessed using correlations and known-group differences evaluated using regression. Responsiveness was evaluated using effect sizes and analysis of variance to compare change scores between groups, defined by patient-reported and clinical outcomes. Results The sample comprised 1315 patients at baseline. No PBMs were associated with visual acuity and only the ICECAP-O (Spearman's rs = - 0.35), EQ-5D-3L + VIS (rs = - 0.42) and EQ-5D-5L (Value Set for England rs = - 0.31) correlated at least moderately with the Cat-PROM5. Effect sizes of change were consistently largest for the EQ-5D-3L + VIS (range 0.34-0.41), followed by the ICECAP-O (range 0.20-0.34). Results indicated no improvement in responsiveness using the EQ-5D-5L (range 0.13-0.16) compared to the EQ-5D-3L (range 0.17-0.20). Conclusions Whilst no PBMs comprehensively demonstrated evidence of construct validity and responsiveness in cataract surgery patients, the ICECAP-O was the most responsive generic PBM to improvements in QOL. Surprisingly the EQ-5D-5L was not more responsive than the EQ-5D-3L in this setting.
引用
收藏
页码:1935 / 1946
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Validation and comparison of five preference-based measures among age-related macular degeneration patients: evidence from mainland China
    Si, Yanhui
    Li, Shunping
    Xu, Yanjiao
    Chen, Gang
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2022, 31 (05) : 1561 - 1572
  • [22] Preference-Based Measures in Dermatology: An Overview of Utilities and Willingness to Pay
    Seidler, Anne M.
    Kini, Seema P.
    DeLong, Laura K.
    Veledar, Emir
    Chen, Suephy C.
    DERMATOLOGIC CLINICS, 2012, 30 (02) : 223 - +
  • [23] Assessing the validity and responsiveness of a generic preference quality of life measure in the context of posttraumatic stress disorder
    Matthews, Sheradyn R.
    Elizabeth, Marja
    Roberts, Larissa N.
    Kaambwa, Billingsley
    Wade, Tracey D.
    Nixon, Reginald D. V.
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2023, 32 (10) : 2817 - 2827
  • [24] Using preference-based measures to assess quality of life in stuttering
    Bramlett, RE
    Bothe, AK
    Franic, DM
    JOURNAL OF SPEECH LANGUAGE AND HEARING RESEARCH, 2006, 49 (02): : 381 - 394
  • [25] China Health Related Outcomes Measures (CHROME): Development of a New Generic Preference-Based Measure for the Chinese Population
    Wu, Jing
    He, Xiaoning
    Chen, Pinan
    Xie, Shitong
    Li, Xue
    Hu, Hao
    Zhao, Kun
    Xie, Feng
    PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2022, 40 (10) : 957 - 969
  • [26] Generic Preference-based Measures for Low Back Pain: Which of Them Should Be Used?
    Finch, Aureliano Paolo
    Dritsaki, Melina
    Jommi, Claudio
    SPINE, 2016, 41 (06) : E364 - E374
  • [27] Assessing the health of the nation - The predictive validity of a preference-based measure and self-rated health
    Gold, M
    Franks, P
    Erickson, P
    MEDICAL CARE, 1996, 34 (02) : 163 - 177
  • [28] Which Questionnaire Should Be Used to Measure Quality-of-Life Utilities in Patients with Acute Leukemia? An Evaluation of the Validity and Interpretability of the EQ-5D-5L and Preference-Based Questionnaires Derived from the EORTC QLQ-C30
    van Dongen-Leunis, Annemieke
    Redekop, W. Ken
    Uyl-de Groot, Carin A.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2016, 19 (06) : 834 - 843
  • [29] Mapping between the Roland Morris Questionnaire and Generic Preference-Based Measures
    Khan, Kamran A.
    Madan, Jason
    Petrou, Stavros
    Lamb, Sarah E.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2014, 17 (06) : 686 - 695
  • [30] PREFERENCE-BASED CONDITION-SPECIFIC MEASURES OF HEALTH: WHAT HAPPENS TO CROSS PROGRAMME COMPARABILITY?
    Brazier, John
    Tsuchiya, Aki
    HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2010, 19 (02) : 125 - 129