How do the EQ-5D, SF-6D and the well-being rating scale compare in patients with ankylosing spondylitis?

被引:39
作者
Boonen, Annelies
van der Heijde, Desiree
Landewe, Robert
van Tubergen, Astrid
Mielants, Herman
Dougados, Maxime
van der Linden, Sjef
机构
[1] Univ Hosp, Caphri Res Inst, Dept Internal Med, Div Rheumatol, NL-6202 AZ Maastricht, Netherlands
[2] Ghent Univ Hosp, Dept Rheumatol, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
[3] Univ Paris 05, Hop Cochin, Dept Rheumatol, Paris, France
关键词
D O I
10.1136/ard.2006.060384
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: To compare aspects of validity of EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) and Short-Form-6 Dimensions (SF-6D), two indirect utility instruments, and the well-being rating scale (RS) in ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Methods: EQ-5D, SF-6D and RS were available for 254 patients fulfilling modified New York criteria. 134 patients were part of an observational cohort and 120 were part of a randomised controlled trial (RCT). Aspects of validity assessed were truth (agreement and correlation with external health measures) and discrimination (differentiation between health states, repeatability and detection of treatment effect). Results: Median (range) values were 0.69 (20.08-1.00) for the EQ-5D, 0.65 (0.35-0.95) for the SF-6D and 0.65 (0.14-1.00) for the RS. Agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient) was moderate (0.46-0.55). Instruments correlated equally with disease activity, functioning and quality of life. The SF-6D showed smaller average differences in utility between patients with better and worse disease compared with the EQ-5D and the RS. The smallest detectable difference (SDD) ( in the control group of RCT) was 0.36, 0.17 and 0.33 for EQ-5D, SF-6D and RS, respectively. The ability to detect treatment effect (in the intervention trial) showed standardised effect sizes that were moderate for EQ-5D and SF-6D (0.63 and 0.64) and low for the RS (0.23). Conclusion: In patients with AS, EQ-5D, SF-6D and the RS correlate equally well with external measures of health, but have different psychometric properties. The SDD is most favourable for the SF-6D, but it discriminates less well between patients with different disease severities. The RS has a poorer ability to detect treatment effects. It is difficult to recommend one of the instruments.
引用
收藏
页码:771 / 777
页数:7
相关论文
共 30 条
[21]  
Suarez-Almazor ME, 2001, J RHEUMATOL, V28, P648
[22]   Lack of congruence in the ratings of patients' health status by patients and their physicians [J].
Suarez-Almazor, ME ;
Conner-Spady, B ;
Kendall, CJ ;
Russell, AS ;
Skeith, K .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2001, 21 (02) :113-121
[23]   Value of the time trade off method for measuring utilities in patients with rheumatoid arthritis [J].
Tijhuis, GJ ;
Jansen, SJT ;
Stiggelbout, AM ;
Zwinderman, AH ;
Hazes, JMW ;
Vlieland, TPMV .
ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES, 2000, 59 (11) :892-897
[24]   Cost effectiveness of combined spa-exercise therapy in ankylosing spondylitis:: A randomized controlled trial [J].
Van Tubergen, A ;
Boonen, A ;
Landewé, R ;
Rutten-Van Mölken, M ;
Van der Heijde, D ;
Hidding, A ;
Van der Linden, S .
ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATISM-ARTHRITIS CARE & RESEARCH, 2002, 47 (05) :459-467
[25]  
Van Tubergen A, 2001, ARTHRIT RHEUM-ARTHR, V45, P430, DOI 10.1002/1529-0131(200110)45:5<430::AID-ART362>3.0.CO
[26]  
2-F
[27]  
VANDERLINDEN S, 1984, ARTHRITIS RHEUM, V27, P361
[28]   Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D [J].
Walters, SJ ;
Brazier, JE .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2005, 14 (06) :1523-1532
[29]  
WILLIAMS A, 1990, HEALTH POLICY, V16, P199
[30]  
Wolfe F, 1999, J RHEUMATOL, V26, P469