Comparison of Contemporaneous EQ-5D and SF-6D Responses Using Scoring Algorithms Derived from Similar Valuation Exercises

被引:23
作者
Whitehurst, David G. T. [1 ,2 ]
Norman, Richard [3 ]
Brazier, John E. [4 ]
Viney, Rosalie [3 ]
机构
[1] Simon Fraser Univ, Fac Hlth Sci, Blusson Hall,Room 10504,8888 Univ Dr, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada
[2] Vancouver Coastal Hlth Res Inst, Ctr Clin Epidemiol & Evaluat, Vancouver, BC, Canada
[3] Univ Technol Sydney, Ctr Hlth Econ Res & Evaluat, Sydney, NSW 2007, Australia
[4] Univ Sheffield, Sch Hlth & Related Res, Sheffield, S Yorkshire, England
关键词
comparative analysis; discrete choice experiment; EQ-5D; SF-6D; standard gamble; time trade-off; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; DISCRETE-CHOICE EXPERIMENT; PREFERENCE-BASED MEASURE; TIME TRADE-OFF; STANDARD GAMBLE; UTILITY SCORES; HEALTH STATES; INDEX; INSTRUMENT; QALYS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jval.2014.03.1720
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Objectives: Poor agreement between preference-based health-related quality-of-life instruments has been widely reported across patient and community-based samples. This study compares index scores generated from contemporaneous EQ-5D (3-level version) and SF-6D (SF-36 version) responses using scoring algorithms derived from independently-conducted Australian population-representative discrete choice experiments (DCEs), providing the first comparative analysis of health state valuations using the same method of valuation across the full value sets. Methods: EQ-5D and SF-6D responses from seven patient data sets were transformed into health state valuations using published DCE-derived scoring algorithms. The empirical comparative evaluation consisted of graphical illustration of the location and spread of index scores, reporting of basic descriptive statistics, exploration of between-measure differences in mean index scores, and analysis of agreement. Results: Compared with previously published findings regarding the comparability of "conventional" EQ-5D and SF-6D index scores, health state valuations from the DCE-derived scoring procedures showed that agreement between scores remained "fair" (intraclass correlation coefficient values across the seven data sets ranged from 0.375 to 0.615). Mean SF-6D scores were significantly lower than the respective mean EQ-5D score across all patient groups (mean difference for the whole sample = 0.253). Conclusions: The magnitude of disagreement previously reported between EQ-5D and SF-6D index scores is not ameliorated through the application of DCE-derived value sets; sizeable discrepancies remain. These findings suggest that differences between EQ-5D and SF-6D index scores persist because of their respective descriptive systems. Further research is required to explore the implications of variations in the descriptive systems of preference-based instruments.
引用
收藏
页码:570 / 577
页数:8
相关论文
共 52 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1996, COST EFFECTIVENESS H, DOI DOI 10.1093/OSO/9780195108248.001.0001
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2013, GUID METH TECHN APPR
  • [3] Using a discrete choice experiment to estimate health state utility values
    Bansback, Nick
    Brazier, John
    Tsuchiya, Aki
    Anis, Aslam
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2012, 31 (01) : 306 - 318
  • [4] A comparison of the quality of life of hearing-impaired people as estimated by three different utility measures
    Barton, GR
    Bankart, J
    Davis, AC
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AUDIOLOGY, 2005, 44 (03) : 157 - 163
  • [5] STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
    BLAND, JM
    ALTMAN, DG
    [J]. LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) : 307 - 310
  • [6] A new explanation for the difference between time trade-off utilities and standard gamble utilities
    Bleichrodt, H
    [J]. HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2002, 11 (05) : 447 - 456
  • [7] The validity of QALYs: An experimental test of constant proportional tradeoff and utility independence
    Bleichrodt, H
    Johannesson, M
    [J]. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 1997, 17 (01) : 21 - 32
  • [8] The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36
    Brazier, J
    Roberts, J
    Deverill, M
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2002, 21 (02) : 271 - 292
  • [9] A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups
    Brazier, J
    Roberts, J
    Tsuchiya, A
    Busschbach, J
    [J]. HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2004, 13 (09) : 873 - 884
  • [10] Developing and testing methods for deriving preference-based measures of health from condition-specific measures (and other patient-based measures of outcome) Introduction
    Brazier, J. E.
    Rowen, D.
    Mavranezouli, I.
    Tsuchiya, A.
    Young, T.
    Yang, Y.
    Barkham, M.
    Ibbotson, R.
    [J]. HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, 2012, 16 (32) : 1 - +