The validity of the EQ-5D-3L items: an investigation with type 2 diabetes patients from six European countries

Uwe Konerding, Sylvia G Elkhuizen, Raquel Faubel, Paul Forte, Tomi Malmström, Elpida Pavi, M F Bas Janssen, Uwe Konerding, Sylvia G Elkhuizen, Raquel Faubel, Paul Forte, Tomi Malmström, Elpida Pavi, M F Bas Janssen

Abstract

Background: Most previous studies concerning the validity of the EQ-5D-3L items refer to applications of only a single language version of the EQ-5D-3L in only one country. Therefore, there is little information concerning the extent to which the results can be generalised across different language versions and/or different countries. Here the validity of the EQ-5D-3L items is investigated for six different language versions in six different countries.

Methods: Data came from 1341 type 2 diabetes patients (England: 289; Finland: 177; Germany: 255; Greece: 165; the Netherlands: 354; Spain: 101). The relationships of the five EQ-5D-3L items with seven different test variables (age, gender, education, previous stroke, problems with heart, problems with lower extremities, problems with eyes), were analysed for each combination of item and test variable. For each combination two logistic regression models with the dichotomised EQ-5D-3L item as dependent variable were computed. The first model contained the test variable and dummy coded countries as independent variables, the second model additionally the terms for the interaction between country and test variable. Statistically significant better fit of the second model was taken as evidence for country specific differences regarding the relationship. When such differences could be attributed mainly to one country the analyses were repeated without the data from this country. Validity was investigated with the remaining data using results of the first models.

Results: Due to lack of variation in the Spanish data only 31 of the originally intended 35 interaction tests could be performed. Only three of these yielded a significant result. In all three cases the Spanish data deviated most. Without the Spanish data only 1 of the 35 interaction tests yielded a significant result. With 3 exceptions, the tendency of reporting problems increased with age, female gender, lower education, previous stroke, heart problems, problems with lower extremities and problems with eyes for all EQ-5D-3L items.

Conclusion: The results concerning the European Spanish version are ambiguous. However, the items of the English, Finnish, German, Greek and Dutch versions of the EQ-5D-3L relate in substantially the same way to the test variables. Mostly, these relationships indicate the items' validity.

References

    1. Brooks R & The EuroQol Group EuroQol: The current state of play. Health Policy. 1996;37(1):53–72. doi: 10.1016/0168-8510(96)00822-6.
    1. Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med. 2001;33(5):337–343. doi: 10.3109/07853890109002087.
    1. Brauer CA, Rosen AB, Greenberg D, Neumann PJ. Trends in the measurement of health utilities in published cost-utility analyses. Value Health. 2006;9:213–218. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00116.x.
    1. EuroQol Group: EQ-5D-3L.. Accessed June 10th 2014.
    1. Szende A, Oppe M, Devlin N. EQ-5D value sets: Inventory, comparative review and user guide. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer; 2007.
    1. Aburuz S, Bulatova N, Twalbeh M, Gazawi M. The validity and reliability of the Arabic version of the EQ-5D: a study from Jordan. Ann Saudi Med. 2009;29(4):304–308. doi: 10.4103/0256-4947.55313.
    1. Brettschneider C, König HH, Herzog W, Kaufmann C, Schaefert R, Konnopka A. Validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D in assessing and valuing health status in patients with somatoform disorders. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11:3. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-11-3.
    1. Hunger M, Sabariego C, Stollenwerk B, Cieza A, Leidl R. Validity, reliability and responsiveness of the EQ-5D in German stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation. Qual Life Res. 2012;21(7):1205–1216. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-0024-3.
    1. König HH, Born A, Günther O, Matschinger H, Heinrich S, Riedel-Heller SG, Angermeyer MC, Roick C. Validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D in assessing and valuing health status in patients with anxiety disorders. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010;8:47. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-8-47.
    1. König HH, Roick C, Angermeyer MC. Validity of the EQ-5D in assessing and valuing health status in patients with schizophrenic, schizotypal or delusional disorders. Eur Psychiatry. 2007;22(3):177–187. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2006.08.004.
    1. Kontodimopoulos N, Pappa E, Niakas D, Yfantopoulos J, Dimitrakaki C, Tountas Y. Validity of the EuroQoL (EQ-5D) instrument in a Greek general population. Value Health. 2008;11(7):1162–1169. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00356.x.
    1. Luo N, Low S, Lau PN, Au WL, Tan LC. Is EQ-5D a valid quality of life instrument in patients with Parkinson's disease? A study in Singapore. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2009;38(6):521–528.
    1. Öster C, Willebrand M, Dyster-Aas J, Kildal M, Ekselius L. Validation of the EQ-5D questionnaire in burn injured adults. Burns. 2009;35(5):723–732. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2008.11.007.
    1. Savoia E, Fantini MP, Pandolfi PP, Dallolio L, Collina N. Assessing the construct validity of the Italian version of the EQ-5D: preliminary results from a cross-sectional study in North Italy. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:47. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-4-47.
    1. Shafie AA, Hassali MA, Liau SY. A cross-sectional validation study of EQ-5D among the Malaysian adult population. Qual Life Res. 2011;20(4):593–600. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9774-6.
    1. Stark RG, Reitmeir P, Leidl R, König HH. Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the EQ-5D in inflammatory bowel disease in Germany. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2010;16(1):42–51. doi: 10.1002/ibd.20989.
    1. Sun S, Chen J, Johannesson M, Kind P, Xu L, Zhang Y, Burström K. Population health status in China: EQ-5D results, by age, sex and socio-economic status, from the National Health Services Survey 2008. Qual Life Res. 2011;20(3):309–320. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9762-x.
    1. Faridah A, Jamaiyah H, Goh A, Soraya A. The validation of the EQ-5D in Malaysian dialysis patients. Med J Malaysia. 2010;65(Suppl A):114–119.
    1. König HH, Bernert S, Angermeyer MC, Matschinger H, Martinez M, Vilagut G, Haro JM, de Girolamo G, de Graaf R, Kovess V, Alonso J, ESEMeD/MHEDEA 2000 Investigators Comparison of population health status in six european countries: results of a representative survey using the EQ-5D questionnaire. Med Care. 2009;47(2):255–261. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318184759e.
    1. Wang HM, Patrick DL, Edwards TC, Skalicky AM, Zeng HY, Gu WW. Validation of the EQ-5D in a general population sample in urban China. Qual Life Res. 2012;21(1):155–160. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9915-6.
    1. Kumar V, Abbas AK, Fausto N, Robbins SL, Cotran RS. Robbins and Cotran Pathologic Basis of Disease. 7. Philadelphia, Pa: Elsevier Saunders; 2005.
    1. Melmed S, Polonsky K, Larsen PR, Kronenberg H, Williams . Textbook of Endocrinology. 12. Philadelphia: Elsevier/Saunders; 2011.
    1. Managed Outcomes Consortium: Managed Outcomes.. Accessed 30 May 2014
    1. Nagelkerke NJD. A Note on a General Definition of the Coefficient of Determination. Biometrika. 1991;78(3):691–692. doi: 10.1093/biomet/78.3.691.
    1. Cherepanov D, Palta M, Fryback DG. Underlying dimensions of the five health-related quality-of-life measures used in utility assessment: evidence from the National Health Measurement Study. Med Care. 2010;48(8):718–725. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181e35871.
    1. Essink-Bot ML, Krabbe PF, Bonsel GJ, Aaronson NK. An empirical comparison of four generic health status measures. The Nottingham Health Profile, the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey, the COOP/WONCA charts, and the EuroQol instrument. Med Care. 1997;35(5):522–537. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199705000-00008.
    1. Konerding U, Moock J, Kohlmann T. The classification systems of the EQ-5D, the HUI II and the SF-6D: what do they have in common? Qual Life Res. 2009;18(9):1249–1261. doi: 10.1007/s11136-009-9525-8.
    1. Dupre ME. Educational differences in age-related patterns of disease: reconsidering the cumulative disadvantage and age-as-leveler hypotheses. J Health Soc Behav. 2007;48(1):1–15. doi: 10.1177/002214650704800101.
    1. Dupre ME. Educational differences in health risks and illness over the life course: a test of cumulative disadvantage theory. Soc Sci Res. 2008;37(4):1253–1266. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2008.05.007.
    1. Khang YH, Lynch JW, Kaplan GA. Health inequalities in Korea: age- and sex-specific educational differences in the 10 leading causes of death. Int J Epidemiol. 2004;33(2):299–308. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyg244.
    1. Silventoinen K, Lahelma E. Health inequalities by education and age in four Nordic countries, 1986 and 1994. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002;56(4):253–258. doi: 10.1136/jech.56.4.253.
    1. Ayerbe L, Ayis S, Wolfe CD, Rudd AG. Natural history, predictors and outcomes of depression after stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry. 2013;202(1):14–21. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.111.107664.
    1. Mitchell AJ, Ferguson DW, Gill J, Paul J, Symonds P. Depression and anxiety in long-term cancer survivors compared with spouses and healthy controls: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(8):721–732. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70244-4.
    1. Roy T, Lloyd CE. Epidemiology of depression and diabetes: a systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2012;142(Suppl):S8–21. doi: 10.1016/S0165-0327(12)70004-6.
    1. Arber S, Cooper H. Gender differences in health in later life: the new paradox? Soc Sci Med. 1999;48:61–76. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00289-5.
    1. Frederiksen H, Hjelmborg J, Mortensen J, McGue M, Vaupel JW, Christensen K. Age trajectories of grip strength: cross-sectional and longitudinal data among 8,342 Danes aged 46 to 102. Ann Epidemiol. 2006;16:554–562. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2005.10.006.
    1. Leveille SG, Penninx BW, Melzer D, Izmirlian G, Guralnik JM. Sex differences in the prevalence of mobility disability in old age: the dynamics of incidence, recovery, and mortality. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2000;55:S41–S50. doi: 10.1093/geronb/55.1.S41.
    1. Nybo H, Gaist D, Jeune B, McGue M, Vaupel JW, Christensen K. Functional status and self-rated health in 2,262 nonagenarians: The Danish 1905 Cohort Survey. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001;49:601–609. doi: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2001.49121.x.
    1. Helgeson VS. Prototypes and dimensions of masculinity and femininity. Sex Roles. 1994;31:n11–12. doi: 10.1007/BF01544286.

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する