Comparison of 5 Health-Related Quality-of-Life Indexes Using Item Response Theory Analysis

被引:78
作者
Fryback, Dennis G. [1 ]
Palta, Mari [1 ]
Cherepanov, Dasha [1 ]
Bolt, Daniel [2 ]
Kim, Jee-Seon [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Populat Hlth Sci, Madison, WI 53726 USA
[2] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Educ Psychol, Madison, WI 53726 USA
关键词
quality-of-life; health status indexes; EQ-5D; SF-36; HUI2; HUI3; QWB; item response theory; MARK; 3; POPULATION; EQ-5D;
D O I
10.1177/0272989X09347016
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
Background. Five health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) indexes-EQ-5D, HUI2, HUI3, QWB-SA, and SF-6D-are each used to assign community-based utility scores to health states, although these scores differ. Objective. The authors transform these indexes to a common scale to understand their interrelationships. Methods. Data were from the National Health Measurement Study, a telephone survey of 3844 US adults. The 5 indexes were analyzed using item response theory analysis to estimate scores on an underlying construct of summary health, theta. Unidimensionality was evaluated using nonlinear principal components analysis. Index scores were plotted against the estimated scores on the common underlying construct. In addition, scores on the Health and Activities Limitation Index (HALex), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Healthy Days questions, and self-rated health on a 5-category scale ranging from excellent to poor were plotted. Results. SF-6D and QWB-SA are nearly linear across the range of theta but with a shallow slope; EQ-5D, HUI2, and HUI3 are linear with a steep slope from low theta (poor health) into midrange of theta, then approximately linear with a less steep slope for higher theta (health just below to well above average), although the inflection points differ by index. Conclusion. Simple linear functions may serve as crosswalks among these indexes only for lower health states, albeit with low precision. Ceiling effects make crosswalks among most of the indexes ill specified above a certain level of health. Although each index measures generic health on a utility scale, these indexes are not identical but are relatively simply, if imprecisely, related.
引用
收藏
页码:5 / 15
页数:11
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]  
Baker F. B., 2004, Item Response Theory, DOI [10.1201/9781482276725, DOI 10.1201/9781482276725]
[2]   Is the Health Utilities Index valid in total hip arthroplasty patients? [J].
Blanchard, C ;
Feeny, D ;
Mahon, JRL ;
Bourne, R ;
Rorabeck, C ;
Stitt, L ;
Webster-Bogaert, S .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2004, 13 (02) :339-348
[3]   The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12 [J].
Brazier, JE ;
Roberts, J .
MEDICAL CARE, 2004, 42 (09) :851-859
[4]   ROBUST LOCALLY WEIGHTED REGRESSION AND SMOOTHING SCATTERPLOTS [J].
CLEVELAND, WS .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 1979, 74 (368) :829-836
[5]   Comparing the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) with the Short Form-36 Preference-Based SF-6D in Chronic Kidney Disease [J].
Davison, Sara ;
Jhangri, Gian S. ;
Feeny, David H. .
VALUE IN HEALTH, 2009, 12 (02) :340-345
[6]   Evaluation of a population-based measure of quality of life: the Health and Activity Limitation Index (HALex) [J].
Erickson, P .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 1998, 7 (02) :101-114
[7]   US norms for six generic health-related quality-of-life indexes from the national health measurement study [J].
Fryback, Dennis G. ;
Dunham, Nancy Cross ;
Palta, Mari ;
Hanmer, Janel ;
Buechner, Jennifer ;
Cherepanov, Dasha ;
Herrington, Shani A. ;
Hays, Ron D. ;
Kaplan, Robert M. ;
Ganiats, Theodore G. ;
Feeny, David ;
Kind, Paul .
MEDICAL CARE, 2007, 45 (12) :1162-1170
[8]  
Houle C., 2000, QUALITY LIFE NEWSLET, V24, P5
[9]   Understanding differences between self-ratings and population ratings for health in the EuroQOL [J].
Insinga, RP ;
Fryback, DG .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2003, 12 (06) :611-619
[10]  
Kaplan RM, 2005, MED CARE, V43, P79