Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-019-02128-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Given the importance of measuring health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for cost–utility studies, this study aimed to determine the validity and responsiveness of two preference-based HRQoL instruments, the EuroQol-five dimensions-five levels questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and the Sheffield Preference-based Venous Ulcer questionnaire (SPVU-5D) in patients with venous leg ulcers (VLUs) in an Australian setting.
This study analysed de-identified data collected from 80 patients with VLUs recruited by a prospective study in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. Patients were asked to complete EQ-5D-5L and SPVU-5D surveys at baseline, 1-month, 3-month and 6-month follow-up as part of the prospective study. Baseline data and follow-up data were pooled to test the construct validity and level of agreement of the two instruments. Follow-up data were used to test the responsiveness.
The ceiling effects were negligible for EQ-5D-5L and SPVU-5D utility scores. Both instruments were able to discriminate between healed VLU and unhealed VLU and showed great responsiveness when healing status changed over time. Weak to strong correlations were found between dimensions of EQ-5D-5L and SPVU-5D. The utility scores produced from EQ-5D-5L were generally lower.
This study found that both EQ-5D-5L and SPVU-5D were valid and responsive in detecting change of VLU healing status among a small Australian population. Both instruments may be used in economic evaluation studies that involve patients with healed or unhealed VLUs. However, given the limitations presented in this study, further research is necessary to make sound recommendations on the preferred instrument in economic evaluation of VLU-related interventions.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 35 KB)11136_2019_2128_MOESM1_ESM.docx
Graham, I. D., Harrison, M. B., Nelson, E. A., Lorimer, K., & Fisher, A. (2003). Prevalence of lower-limb ulceration: A systematic review of prevalence studies. Advances in Skin & Wound Care, 16(6), 305–316. CrossRef
Nelson, E. A. (2011). Venous leg ulcers. BMJ Clinical Evidence.
Baker, S. R., & Stacey, M. C. (1994). Epidemiology of chronic leg ulcers in AUSTRALIA. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Surgery, 64(4), 258–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.1994.tb02196.x. CrossRefPubMed
Bergqvist, D., Lindholm, C., & Nelzén, O. (1999). Chronic leg ulcers: The impact of venous disease. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 29(4), 752–755. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0741-5214(99)70330-7. CrossRefPubMed
Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. (2010). Management of chronic venous leg ulcers: A national clinical guideline.
Herberger, K., Rustenbach, S. J., Grams, L., Munter, K. C., Schafer, E., & Augustin, M. (2012). Quality-of-care for leg ulcers in the metropolitan area of Hamburg: A community-based study. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, 26(4), 495–502. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3083.2011.04110.x. CrossRefPubMed
Green, J., Jester, R., McKinley, R., & Pooler, A. (2014). The impact of chronic venous leg ulcers: A systematic review. Journal of Wound Care, 23(12), 601–612. https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2014.23.12.601. CrossRefPubMed
Gonzalez-Consuegra, R. V., & Verdu, J. (2011). Quality of life in people with venous leg ulcers: An integrative review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67(5), 926–944. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05568.x. CrossRefPubMed
Palfreyman, S. J. (2008). Assessing the impact of venous ulceration on quality of life. Nursing Times, 104(41), 34–37. PubMed
Brown, A. (2005). Chronic leg ulcers, part 2: Do they affect a patient’s social life? British Journal of Nursing, 14(18), 986–989. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2005.14.18.19888. CrossRefPubMed
NHS England. (2017). National Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) Programme Guidance.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2009). Guidance for industry patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims.
Butterworth, P., & Crosier, T. (2004). The validity of the SF-36 in an Australian National Household Survey: Demonstrating the applicability of the Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey to examination of health inequalities. BMC Public Health, 4, 44–44. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-4-44. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Viney, R., Norman, R., King, M. T., Cronin, P., Street, D. J., Knox, S., et al. (2011). Time trade-off derived EQ-5D weights for Australia. Value Health, 14(6), 928–936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.04.009. CrossRefPubMed
Iglesias, C. P., Birks, Y., Nelson, E. A., Scanlon, E., & Cullum, N. A. (2005). Quality of life of people with venous leg ulcers: A comparison of the discriminative and responsive characteristics of two generic and a disease specific instruments. Quality of Life Research, 14(7), 1705–1718. CrossRefPubMed
Jull, A., Parag, V., Walker, N., & Rodgers, A. (2010). Responsiveness of generic and disease-specific health-related quality of life instruments to venous ulcer healing. Wound Repair and Regeneration, 18(1), 26–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-475X.2009.00556.x. CrossRefPubMed
Palfreyman, S. J., & Brazier, J. (2012). PCV80 The Development and valuation of the Sheffield Preference Based Leg Ulcer Questionnaire (SPVU-5D). Value in Health, 15(4), A126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.03.683. CrossRef
Stevens, K., & Palfreyman, S. (2012). The use of qualitative methods in developing the descriptive systems of preference-based measures of health-related quality of life for use in economic evaluation. Value in Health, 15(8), 991–998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.2204. CrossRefPubMed
Palfreyman, S. J. (2011). The SPVU-5D: A preference-based measure of health related quality of life for use with venous leg ulceration (Vol. 45). PRO Newsletter.
Barnsbee, L., Cheng, Q., Tulleners, R., Lee, X., Brain, D., & Pacella, R. (2018). Measuring costs and quality of life for venous leg ulcers. International Wound Journal. In Press.
R Core Team (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. http://www.R-project.org/.
Kim, S. (2015). ppcor: An R package for a fast calculation to semi-partial correlation coefficients. Communications for statistical applications and methods, 22(6), 665–674. https://doi.org/10.5351/CSAM.2015.22.6.665. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Campbell, M. J., & Swinscow, T. D. V. (2011). Chapter 11. Correlation and regression. In Statistics at Square One: Wiley.
Zhao, F., Yue, M., Yang, H., Wang, T., Wu, J., & Li, S.-C. (2010). Validation and comparison of EuroQol and short form 6D in chronic prostatitis patients. Value in Health, 13(5), 649–656. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00728.x. CrossRefPubMed
Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Carstensen, B., Simpson, J., & Gurrin, L. C. (2008). Statistical models for assessing agreement in method comparison studies with replicate measurements. International Journal of Biostatistics. 4(1), Article 16.
Versteegh, M. M., Leunis, A., Uyl-de Groot, C. A., & Stolk, E. A. (2012). Condition-specific preference-based measures: Benefit or burden? Value Health, 15(3), 504–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.12.003. CrossRefPubMed
Mulhern, B., Pink, J., Rowen, D., Borghs, S., Butt, T., Hughes, D., et al. (2017). Comparing generic and condition-specific preference-based measures in epilepsy: EQ-5D-3L and NEWQOL-6D. Value Health, 20(4), 687–693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.03.1860. CrossRefPubMed
Wu, J., Han, Y., Zhao, F. L., Zhou, J., Chen, Z., & Sun, H. (2014). Validation and comparison of EuroQoL-5 dimension (EQ-5D) and Short Form-6 dimension (SF-6D) among stable angina patients. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 12, 156. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-014-0156-6. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Kularatna, S., Byrnes, J., Chan, Y. K., Ski, C. F., Carrington, M., Thompson, D., et al. (2017). Comparison of the EQ-5D-3L and the SF-6D (SF-12) contemporaneous utility scores in patients with cardiovascular disease. Quality of Life Research, 26(12), 3399–3408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1666-6. CrossRefPubMed
Zhao, F. L., Yue, M., Yang, H., Wang, T., Wu, J. H., & Li, S. C. (2010). Validation and comparison of EuroQol and short form 6D in chronic prostatitis patients. Value Health, 13(5), 649–656. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00728.x. CrossRefPubMed
Clemens, S., Begum, N., Harper, C., Whitty, J. A., & Scuffham, P. A. (2014). A comparison of EQ-5D-3L population norms in Queensland, Australia, estimated using utility value sets from Australia, the UK and USA. Quality of Life Research, 23(8), 2375–2381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0676-x. CrossRefPubMed
- Comparison of EQ-5D-5L and SPVU-5D for measuring quality of life in patients with venous leg ulcers in an Australian setting
Xing J. Lee
Rosana E. Pacella
- Springer International Publishing