US population norms for the EQ-5D-5L and comparison of norms from face-to-face and online samples
Tóm tắt
Normative scores (norms) allow for comparisons between population(s) of interest and the general population, which is useful for burden of disease studies and cost-effectiveness analysis. The primary aim of this study was to estimate US visual analogue scale (EQ VAS) and utility-based norms for the EQ-5D-5L using the face-to-face sample. The secondary aim was to compare norms estimated in the face-to-face and online populations. This study estimated population norms from two general population surveys: (a) face-to-face and (b) online. In these surveys, respondents provided their health state using the EQ-5D-5L health classifier and the EQ VAS. Descriptive statistics, including mean, standard deviation (SD), 95% confidence interval, and median for the 5L utility and EQ VAS were estimated for each sample and across relevant respondent characteristics to serve as the basis for US EQ-5D-5L norms Face-to-face sample respondents (n = 1134) were representative of the US adult general population. In this sample, mean (SD) utility decreased with increasing age until age 45 or greater (age 45–54: 0.816 (0.249) age 55–64: 0.815 (0.243) age 65–74: 0.824 (0.217) age 75 + : 0.811 (0.218)). With increasing age, more problems were reported on all dimensions except anxiety/depression; a smaller proportion of respondents age 65 and older reported problems with anxiety/depression (23.8%) as compared to the youngest respondents (42.1%). Online (n = 2018) mean utility and EQ VAS values were consistently lower than the face-to-face sample. The availability of US EQ-5D-5L norms facilitates interpretation and understanding of general population and patient health.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Brazier, J., Ratcliffe, J., Salomon, J. A., & Tsuchiya, A. (2017). Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Devlin, N. J., & Brooks, R. (2017). EQ-5D and the EuroQol group: past, present and future. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 15(2), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-017-0310-5.
Al-Sayah, F. (2016). Measuring and valuing health: applications of the EQ-5D. https://apersu.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Measuring-and-valuing-health-using-the-EQ-5D.pdf. Accessed January 1 2020.
Devlin, N. J. (2016). 5 things you should do with EQ-5D data. https://www.ohe.org/news/5-things-you-should-do-eq-5d-data. Accessed January 1 2020.
Huber, M. B., Reitmeir, P., Vogelmann, M., & Leidl, R. (2016). EQ-5D-5L in the General german population: comparison and evaluation of three yearly cross-section surveys. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13(3), 343. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13030343.
Yang, F., Devlin, N., & Luo, N. (2019). Cost-utility analysis using EQ-5D-5L data: does how the utilities are derived matter? Value Health, 22(1), 45–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2018.05.008.
Gerlinger, C., Bamber, L., Leverkus, F., Schwenke, C., Haberland, C., Schmidt, G., et al. (2019). Comparing the EQ-5D-5L utility index based on value sets of different countries: impact on the interpretation of clinical study results. BMC Research Notes, 12(1), 18–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-019-4067-9.
Nolan, C. M., Longworth, L., Lord, J., Canavan, J. L., Jones, S. E., Kon, S. S. C., et al. (2016). The EQ-5D-5L health status questionnaire in COPD: validity, responsiveness and minimum important difference. Thorax, 71(6), 493–500. https://doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2015-207782.
EQ-5D-5L User Guide—Basic information on how to use the EQ-5D-5L instrument (2019). https://euroqol.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/EQ-5D-5L-English-User-Guide_version-3.0-Sept-2019-secured.pdf. Accessed January 1 2020.
Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., Janssen, M., Kind, P., Parkin, D., et al. (2011). Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Quality of Life Research, 20(10), 1727–1736. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x.
Janssen, M. F., Szende, A., Cabases, J., Ramos-Goni, J. M., Vilagut, G., & Konig, H. H. (2019). Population norms for the EQ-5D-3L: a cross-country analysis of population surveys for 20 countries. The European Journal of Health Economics, 20(2), 205–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-018-0955-5.
Self-Reported Population Health: An International Perspective based on EQ-5D (2014). Dordrecht (NL).
Golicki, D., & Niewada, M. (2017). EQ-5D-5L Polish population norms. Archives of Medical Science, 13(1), 191–200. https://doi.org/10.5114/aoms.2015.52126.
Bailey, H., Janssen, M. F., La Foucade, A., & Kind, P. (2019). EQ-5D-5L population norms and health inequalities for Trinidad and Tobago. PLoS One, 14(4), e0214283. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214283.
Janssen, B., & Szende, A. (2014). Population norms for the EQ-5D. In A. Szende, B. Janssen, & J. Cabases (Eds.), Self-reported population health: An international perspective based on (EQ-5D. ed.). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7596-1_3.
McCaffrey, N., Kaambwa, B., Currow, D. C., & Ratcliffe, J. (2016). Health-related quality of life measured using the EQ-5D–5L: South Australian population norms. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 14(1), 133. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-016-0537-0.
Purba, F. D., Hunfeld, J. A. M., Iskandarsyah, A., Fitriana, T. S., Sadarjoen, S. S., Passchier, J., et al. (2018). Quality of life of the Indonesian general population: test-retest reliability and population norms of the EQ-5D-5L and WHOQOL-BREF. PLoS One, 13(5), e0197098. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197098.
The APERSU Team (2018). Alberta population norms for EQ-5D-5L. https://apersu.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Alberta-Norms-Report_APERSU.pdf. Accessed April 5 2020.
Yang, Z., Busschbach, J., Liu, G., & Luo, N. (2018). EQ-5D-5L norms for the urban Chinese population in China. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 16(1), 210. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-1036-2.
Burström, K., Johannesson, M., & Diderichsen, F. (2001). Swedish population health-related quality of life results using the EQ-5D. Quality of Life Research, 10(7), 621–635. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013171831202.
Hinz, A., Kohlmann, T., Stöbel-Richter, Y., Zenger, M., & Brähler, E. (2014). The quality of life questionnaire EQ-5D-5L: psychometric properties and normative values for the general German population. Quality of Life Research, 23(2), 443–447. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0498-2.
Hernandez, G., Garin, O., Pardo, Y., Vilagut, G., Pont, À., Suárez, M., et al. (2018). Validity of the EQ–5D–5L and reference norms for the Spanish population. Quality of Life Research, 27(9), 2337–2348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1877-5.
Gutacker, N., Patton, T., Shah, K., & Parkin, D. (2020). Using EQ-5D data to measure hospital performance: are general population values distorting patients’ choices? Medical Decision Making, 40(4), 511–521. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X20927705.
Pickard, A. S., Law, E. H., Jiang, R., Pullenayegum, E., Shaw, J. W., Xie, F., et al. (2019). United States valuation of EQ-5D-5L health states using an international protocol. Value in Health. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2019.02.009.
Oppe, M., Devlin, N. J., van Hout, B., Krabbe, P. F., & de Charro, F. (2014). A program of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value Health, 17(4), 445–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2014.04.002.
Ramos-Goni, J. M., Oppe, M., Slaap, B., Busschbach, J. J., & Stolk, E. (2017). Quality control process for EQ-5D-5L valuation studies. Value Health, 20(3), 466–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.10.012.
Jiang, R., Shaw, J. W., & Pickard, A. S. (2018). Comaprison of online and face-to-face valuations of the EQ-5D-5l using composite time trade-off and discrete choice tasks. Paper presented at the 40th Annual Meeting of the Society for Medical Decision Making, Montréal, Québec, Canada, October 13–17, 2018
Jiang, R., Muehlbacher, A., Shaw, J. W., Lee, T. A., Walton, S., & Pickard, A. S. (2019). Assessment of the effect of mode of administration on TTO-based preferences. Paper presented at the 10th Meeting “International Academy of Health Preference Research” Basel, Switzerland, 13–14 July, 2019
Stolk, E., Ludwig, K., Rand, K., van Hout, B., & Ramos-Goni, J. M. (2019). Overview, update, and lessons learned from the international EQ-5D-5L valuation work: version 2 of the EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value Health, 22(1), 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2018.05.010.
Oppe, M., & van Hout, B. (2017). The “power” of eliciting EQ-5D-5L values: the experimental design of the EQ-VT. EuroQol Working Paper Series: EuroQol Research Foundation.
Ramos-Goñi, J. M., Oppe, M., Slaap, B., Busschbach, J. J., & Stolk, E. (2017). Quality control process for EQ-5D-5L valuation studies. Value in Health, 20(3), 466–473.
Versteegh, M. M., Attema, A. E., Oppe, M., Devlin, N. J., & Stolk, E. A. (2013). Time to tweak the TTO: results from a comparison of alternative specifications of the TTO. The European Journal of Health Economics, 14(Suppl 1), S43–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-013-0507-y.
Zahran, H. S., Kobau, R., Moriarty, D. G., Zack, M. M., Holt, J., & Donehoo, R. (2005). Health-related quality of life surveillance—United States, 1993–2002. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5404a1.htm. Accessed July 20 2020.
WHO GUIDE TO COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS (2003). https://www.who.int/choice/publications/p_2003_generalised_cea.pdf. Accessed July 20 2020.
Major Depression (2019). https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/major-depression.shtml. Accessed April 1 2020.
Any Anxiety Disorder (2017). https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/any-anxiety-disorder.shtml#part_155094. Accessed April 1 2020.
Scheffler, R., Arnold, D., Qazi, H., Harney, J., Linde, L., Dimick, G., et al. (2018). The anxious generation: the causes and consequences of anxiety disorder among young Americans. https://gspp.berkeley.edu/assets/uploads/page/Policy_Brief_Final_071618.pdf. Accessed April 1 2020.
Greenwood, K., Bapat, V., & Maughan, M. (2019). Research: people want their employers to talk about mental health. https://hbr.org/2019/10/research-people-want-their-employers-to-talk-about-mental-health. Accessed April 1 2020.
Sampson, C. (2020). Thesis thursday: Hannah Penton. https://aheblog.com/2020/03/19/thesis-thursday-hannah-penton/. Accessed April 1 2020.
Penton, H. (2019). An investigation into the psychometric performance of existing measures of health, quality of life and wellbeing in older adults. https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/24556/. Accessed April 1 2020.
Ratcliffe, J., Lancsar, E., Flint, T., Kaambwa, B., Walker, R., Lewin, G., et al. (2017). Does one size fit all? Assessing the preferences of older and younger people for attributes of quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 26(2), 299–309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1391-6.
Segal, D. L., Coolidge, F. L., Mincic, M. S., & O'Riley, A. (2005). Beliefs about mental illness and willingness to seek help: a cross-sectional study. Aging Ment Health, 9(4), 363–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607860500131047.
Chapter 3: trends in morbidity and risk factors (2018). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/health-profile-for-england-2018/chapter-3-trends-in-morbidity-and-risk-factors. Accessed July 20 2020.
Bretschneider, J., Janitza, S., Jacobi, F., Thom, J., Hapke, U., Kurth, T., et al. (2018). Time trends in depression prevalence and health-related correlates: results from population-based surveys in Germany 1997–1999 vs. 2009–2012. BMC Psychiatry, 18(1), 394–394. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-018-1973-7.
Barclay, R., & Tate, R. B. (2014). Response shift recalibration and reprioritization in health-related quality of life was identified prospectively in older men with and without stroke. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(5), 500–507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.12.003.
Sprangers, M. A., & Schwartz, C. E. (1999). Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: a theoretical model. Social Science and Medicine, 48(11), 1507–1515. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00045-3.
Poder, T. G., Carrier, N., & Kouakou, C. R. C. (2020). Quebec health-related quality-of-life population norms using the EQ-5D-5L: decomposition by sociodemographic data and health problems. Value Health, 23(2), 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2019.08.008.
Hanmer, J., Hays, R. D., & Fryback, D. G. (2007). Mode of administration is important in US national estimates of health-related quality of life. Medical Care, 45(12), 1171–1179.
Duffy, B., Smith, K., Terhanian, G., & Bremer, J. (2005). Comparing data from online and face-to-face surveys. International Journal of Market Research, 47(6), 615–639. https://doi.org/10.1177/147078530504700602.
Kennedy, C., Mercer, A., Keeter, S., Hatley, N., McGeeney, K., & Gimenez, A. (2016). Evaluating online nonprobability surveys. https://www.pewresearch.org/methods/2016/05/02/evaluating-online-nonprobability-surveys/. Accessed April 1 2020.
Baker, R. E. G., Blumberg, S. J., Brick, J. M., Couper, M. P., Courtright, M., Dennis, J. M., et al. (2010). AAPOR report on online panels. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 74(4), 711–781.
SurveyEngine (2018). Personal communication.