Advertisement

Quality of Life Research

, Volume 23, Issue 8, pp 2355–2363 | Cite as

Comparison between the EQ-5D-5L and the EQ-5D-3L in patients with hepatitis B

  • Y. X. Jia
  • F. Q. Cui
  • L. Li
  • D. L. Zhang
  • G. M Zhang
  • F. Z. Wang
  • X. H. Gong
  • H. Zheng
  • Z. H. Wu
  • N. Miao
  • X. J. Sun
  • L. Zhang
  • J. J. Lv
  • F. Yang
Article

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose of the study was to compare psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L (5L) and the EQ-5D-3L (3L) health outcomes assessment instruments in patients with hepatitis B in China.

Methods

Patients, including hepatitis B virus carriers and those with active or inactive chronic hepatitis B, compensated cirrhosis, decompensated cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma, answered a questionnaire composed of 5L, socio-demographic information, 3L, and the visual analog scale (VAS), respectively. After 1 week, a retest was conducted for inpatients. We compared acceptability, face validity, redistribution properties, convergent validity, known-group validity, discriminatory power, ceiling effect, test–retest reliability, and responsiveness of 5L and 3L.

Results

A total of 369 outpatients and 276 inpatients were recruited for the first interview. Of the inpatients, 183 were used in the retest. Most patients preferred 5L–3L. The 3L–5L response pairs had an inconsistency rate of 2.4 %. Correlation with the VAS was greater with 5L than with 3L. Age, education, and comorbidity were associated with health-related quality of life (HRQoL). 5L discriminated more infectious conditions than 3L. In all dimensions, the Shannon’s index from 5L was larger while in three dimensions the Shannon’s evenness index from 5L was slightly larger. The ceiling effect was reduced in 5L. In patients with stable health states, no significant difference was detected in the weighted kappa between 5L and 3L, but intraclass correlation coefficient of 5L was higher than that of 3L. In patients with improved health states, HRQoL was seen as increased in both 5L and 3L, without significant difference.

Conclusions

The EQ-5D-5L was more suitable than the EQ-5D-3L in the patients with hepatitis B in China.

Keywords

EQ-5D Health-related quality of life Psychometrics Hepatitis B 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The use of two versions of EQ-5D was approved by EuroQol Group. This study was sponsored by National Health and Family Planning Commission and Minister of Science and Technology (No.2012ZX10002001), and we would like to express the special thanks to Rodewald Lance, who provided comments and suggestions on the manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Brazier, J., Deverill, M., & Green, C. (1999). A review of the use of health status measures in economic evaluation. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 4(3), 174–184.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Revicki, D. A., & Lenderking, W. R. (2012). Methods and issues associated with the use of quality-adjusted life-years. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 12(1), 105–114.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zhang, F., Fu, S. Y., Wang, M., & Du, J. (2009). Correlation empirical research on the quality of life of Chinese patients with acute ischemic stoke measured by EQ-5D. China Journal of Pharmaceutical Economics, 6, 5–12.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wu, Y. Q., Liu, K., Tang, X., Cao, Y., Wang, J. W., Li, N., et al. (2012). Empirical research of measuring elderly health utility in the outskirts of Beijing by using European quality of life 5-Dimensions. Journal of Peking University (Health Science), 44(3), 397–402.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhou, L., Jin, H., Deng, Z. H., Cheng, X. W., Li, Z., Hu, S. X., et al. (2012). Measuring quality of life of hospitalized patients with severe acute respiratory infection by EQ-5D instrument: An exploratory study. Practical Preventive Medicine, 19(5), 644–647.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Luo, Y. J., Fang, Y., & Ding, X. S. (2009). Quality of life of patients with type 2 diabetes measured by EQ-5D and its influential factors analysis. China Journal of Pharmaceutical Economics, 2, 12–18.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    He, M. M., & Wu, M. (2009). Using EQ-5D to preliminarily analyze the relation between living mode and health condition in a district in Beijing. Chinese Journal of Gerontology, 29(4), 478–481.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang, H. M., Patrick, D. L., Edwards, T. C., Skalicky, A. M., Zeng, H. Y., & Gu, W. W. (2012). Validation of the EQ-5D in a general population sample in urban China. Quality of Life Research, 21(1), 155–160.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kopec, J. A., & Willison, K. D. (2003). A comparative review of four preference-weighted measures of health-related quality of life. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56(4), 317–325.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brazier, J., Deverill, M., & Green, C. (1999). A review of the use of health status measures in economic evaluation. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 4(3), 174–184.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kopec, J., & Willison, K. (2003). A comparative review of four preference-weighted measures of health-related quality of life. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56(4), 317–325.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Scalone, L., Ciampichini, R., Fagiuoli, S., Gardini, I., Fusco, F., Gaeta, L., et al. (2012). Comparing the performance of the standard EQ-5D 3L with the new version EQ-5D 5L in patients with chronic hepatic diseases. Quality of Life Research, 22(7), 1707–1716.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim, S. H., Kim, H. J., Lee, S. I., et al. (2012). Comparing the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in cancer patients in Korea. Quality of Life Research, 21(6), 1065–1073.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Janssen, M. F., Birnie, E., Haagsma, J. A., & Bonsel, G. J. (2008). Comparing the standard EQ-5D three-level system with a five-level version. Value in Health, 11(2), 275–284.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pickard, A. S., De Leon, M. C., Kohlmann, T., Cella, D., & Rosenbloom, S. (2007). Psychometric comparison of the standard EQ-5D to a 5 level version in cancer patients. Medical Care, 45(3), 259–263.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kim, T. H., Jo, M. W., Lee, S. I., Kim, S. H., & Chung, S. M. (2012). Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in the general population of South Korea. Quality of Life Research, 22(8), 2245–2253.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tsuchiya, A., Ikeda, S., Ikegami, N., Nishimura, S., Sakai, I., Fukuda, T., et al. (2002). Estimating an EQ-5D population value set: The case of Japan. Health Economics, 11(4), 341–353.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    van Hout, B., Janssen, M. F., Feng, Y. S., Kohlmann, T., Busschbach, J., Golicki, D., et al. (2012). Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value in Health, 15(5), 708–715.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Janssen, M. F., Pickard, A. S., Golicki, D., Gudex, C., Niewada, M., Scalone, L., et al. (2013). Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: A multi-country study. Quality of Life Research, 22(7), 1717–1727.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cohen, J. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (Vol. 2). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fayers, P. M., & Machin, D. (2000). Quality of Life-Assessment, Analysis, Interpretation. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sun, S., Chen, J., Johannesson, M., Kind, P., Xu, L., Zhang, Y., et al. (2011). Population health status in China: EQ-5D results, by age, sex and socio-economic status, from the National Health Services Survey 2008. Quality of Life Research, 20(3), 309–320.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wang, H., Kindig, D. A., & Mullahy, J. (2005). Variation in Chinese population health related quality of life: Results from a EuroQol study in Beijing, China. Quality of Life Research, 14(1), 119–132.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Janssen, M. F., Birnie, E., & Bonsel, G. J. (2007). Evaluation the discriminatory power of EQ-5D, HUI2, and HUI3 in a US general population survey using Shannon’s indices. Quality of Life Research, 16(5), 895–904.PubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pickard, A. S., Kohlmann, T., Janssen, M. F., Bonsel, G., Rosenbloom, S., & Cella, D. (2007). Evaluating equivalency between response systems: Application of the Rasch model to a 3-level and 5-level EQ-5D. Medical Care, 45(9), 812–819.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Y. X. Jia
    • 1
  • F. Q. Cui
    • 1
  • L. Li
    • 1
  • D. L. Zhang
    • 2
  • G. M Zhang
    • 1
  • F. Z. Wang
    • 1
  • X. H. Gong
    • 1
  • H. Zheng
    • 1
  • Z. H. Wu
    • 1
  • N. Miao
    • 1
  • X. J. Sun
    • 1
  • L. Zhang
    • 3
  • J. J. Lv
    • 3
  • F. Yang
    • 4
  1. 1.National Immunization ProgramChinese Center for Disease Control and PreventionBeijingChina
  2. 2.Ningbo Center for Disease Control and PreventionNingboChina
  3. 3.Shandong Center for Disease Control and PreventionJinanChina
  4. 4.Qingdao Center for Disease Control and PreventionQingdaoChina

Personalised recommendations