Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D among patients with haemophilia

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
The European Journal of Health Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D, and to compare their performance among patients living with haemophilia in China.

Methods

A total of 875 Chinese patients completed the EQ-5D-5L, SF-6D, and Haem-A-QoL questionnaires. Construct validity of the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D dimensions and indices was assessed by testing hypotheses relating these measures to Haem-A-QoL and clinical measures. The Spearman correlation coefficient was used to assess convergent validity, and one-way analysis of variance (F statistic) was used to assess the known-groups validity (discriminatory power). The agreement between EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D indices was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the Bland–Altman plot.

Results

Both the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D indices showed acceptable ceiling and floor effects. As hypothesised, both EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D were significantly correlated with Haem-A-QoL (both dimensions and overall score). EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D indices as well as EQ-VAS differentiated patients are known to differ in severity of haemophilia, bleeding status, disabling levels, and comorbidity. The F statistics in the known-groups comparisons suggested that the EQ-5D-5L was slightly more discriminative than the SF-6D. ICC (0.41) and Bland–Altman plot confirmed that the agreement between the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D indices was poor.

Conclusion

Both EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D showed satisfactory construct validity in the measurement of the HRQoL among patients with haemophilia. However, the two instruments may not be used interchangeably in this patient population due to their poor agreement and differing discriminatory power.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

The datasets generated during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Srivastava, A., Brewer, A.K., Mauser-Bunschoten, E.P., et al.: Guidelines for the management of hemophilia. Haemophilia 19, e1–e47 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2516.2012.02909.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hemophilia news today. What is hemophilia? https://www.hemophilianewstoday.com/what-is-hemophilia/. Accessed 3 June 2020

  3. WHO-Genes and human diseases. World Health Organ. 2019. http://www.who.int/genomics/public/geneticdiseases/en/. Accessed 3 June 2020

  4. Yang, R., Poon, M.-C., Luke, K.H., et al.: Building a network for hemophilia care in China: 15 years of achievement for the Hemophilia Treatment Center Collaborative Network of China. Blood Adv 3, 34 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2019GS121524

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. O’Hara, J., Walsh, S., Camp, C., et al.: The impact of severe haemophilia and the presence of target joints on health-related quality-of-life. Health Qual Life Outcomes (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-0908-9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Mulder, K., Llinas, A.: The target joint. Haemophilia 10, 152–156 (2004)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Monahan, P.E., Baker, J.R., Riske, B., et al.: Physical functioning in boys with hemophilia in the US. Am J Prev Med 41, S360–S368 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2011.09.017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Peyvandi, F., Jayandharan, G., Chandy, M., et al.: Genetic diagnosis of haemophilia and other inherited bleeding disorders. Haemophilia 12, 82–89 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2516.2006.01263.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Logan, F.A., Maclean, A., Howie, C.A., et al.: Psychological disturbance in children with haemophilia. Br Med J 301, 1253 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.301.6763.1253

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Rambod, M., Sharif, F., Molazem, Z., et al.: Health-related quality of life and psychological aspects of adults with hemophilia in Iran. Clin Appl Thromb 24, 1073–1081 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1177/1076029618758954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Michalowsky, B., Xie, F., Kohlmann, T., et al.: Acceptability and Validity of the EQ-5D in Patients Living With Dementia. Value Health (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2020.01.022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Philipp, C.: The aging patient with hemophilia: complications, comorbidities, and management issues. Hematol Am Soc Hematol Educ Progr 2010, 191 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1182/asheducation-2010.1.191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Pipe, S.W.: Hemophilia: new protein therapeutics. Hematol Am Soc Hematol Educ Progr 2010, 203 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1182/asheducation-2010.1.203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fogarty, P.F.: Biological rationale for new drugs in the bleeding disorders pipeline. Hematol Am Soc Hematol Educ Progr 2011, 397 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1182/asheducation-2011.1.397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Johnson, K.A., Zhou, Z.-Y.: Costs of care in hemophilia and possible implications of health care reform. Hematol Am Soc Hematol Educ Progr 2011, 413 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1182/asheducation-2011.1.413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. High, K.A.: The gene therapy journey for hemophilia: are we there yet? Blood 120, 4482–4487 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2012-05-423210

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Mackensen, S., Gringeri, A.: Development and pilot testing of a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire for adult patients with haemophilia (Haem-A-QoL). Blood 104, 608A-609A (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Young, N.L., Wakefield, C., Burke, T.A., et al.: Updating the Canadian Hemophilia Outcomes-Kids Life Assessment Tool (CHO-KLAT Version 2.0). Value Health 16, 837–841 (2013)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lambert, C., Meité, N., Sanogo, I., et al.: Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Haem-A-QoL in Côte d’Ivoire. Haemophilia 26, 459–466 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1111/hae.13987

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Varaklioti, A., Kontodimopoulos, N., Katsarou, O., et al.: Psychometric properties of the Greek Haem-A-QoL for measuring quality of life in Greek haemophilia patients. Biomed Res Int 2014, 1–12 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Von Mackensen, S., Czepa, D., Herbsleb, M., et al.: Development and validation of a new questionnaire for the assessment of subjective physical performance in adult patients with haemophilia—the HEP-Test-Q. Haemophilia 16, 170–178 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2516.2009.02112.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Trindade, G.C., Viggiano, L.G.L., Brant, E.R., et al.: Evaluation of quality of life in hemophilia patients using the WHOQOL-bref and Haemo-A-Qol questionnaires. Hematol Transfus Cell Ther 41, 335–341 (2019)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Finch, A.P., Brazier, J.E., Mukuria, C.: What is the evidence for the performance of generic preference-based measures? A systematic overview of reviews. Eur J Health Econ 19, 557–570 (2017)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Ramos-Goñi, J.M., Oppe, M., Slaap, B., et al.: Quality control process for EQ-5D-5L valuation studies. Value Health 20, 466–473 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.10.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sullivan, P.W., Ghushchyan, V.H.: EQ-5D scores for diabetes-related comorbidities. Value Health 19, 1002–1008 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.05.018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rencz, F., Gulácsi, L., Drummond, M., et al.: EQ-5D in Central and Eastern Europe: 2000–2015. Qual Life Res 25, 2693–2710 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1375-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Rowen, D., Zouraq, I.A., Chevrou-Severac, H., et al.: International regulations and recommendations for utility data for health technology assessment. Pharmacoeconomics 35, 11–19 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-017-0544-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Abdin, E., Subramaniam, M., Vaingankar, J.A., et al.: Measuring health-related quality of life among adults in Singapore: population norms for the EQ-5D. Qual Life Res 22, 2983–2991 (2013)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Soucie, J.M., Grosse, S.D., Siddiqi, A.E.A., et al.: The effects of joint disease, inhibitors and other complications on health-related quality of life among males with severe haemophilia A in the United States. Haemophilia 23, e287–e293 (2017)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Carroll, L., Benson, G., Lambert, J., et al.: Real-world utilities and health-related quality-of-life data in hemophilia patients in France and the United Kingdom. Patient Prefer Adher 13, 941–957 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Zhao, F., Yue, M., Yang, H., et al.: Validation and comparison of EuroQol and short form 6D in chronic prostatitis patients. Value Health 13, 649–656 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00728.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Öster, C., Willebrand, M., Dyster-Aas, J., et al.: Validation of the EQ-5D questionnaire in burn injured adults. Burns 35, 723–732 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2008.11.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kunz, S.: Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D in a study of people with mild to moderate dementia. An Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehabil 19, 425–434 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9600-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Rabin, R., Charro, F.: EQ-SD: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med 33, 337–343 (2001). https://doi.org/10.3109/07853890109002087

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Luo, N., Liu, G., Li, M., et al.: Estimating an EQ-5D-5L value set for China. Value Health 20, 662–669 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.11.016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Brazier, J., Roberts, J.: The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Med Care 42, 851–859 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000135827.18610.0d

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Deverill, M.: The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 21, 271–292 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6296(01)00130-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Spilker, B.: Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials, 2nd edn. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Yang, F., Lau, T., Lee, E., et al.: Comparison of the preference-based EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Eur J Health Econ 16, 1019–1026 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-014-0664-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Cicchetti, D.V.: Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess 6, 284–290 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Giavarina, D.: Understanding Bland Altman analysis. Biochem Med 25, 141 (2015). https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2015.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Efthymiadou, O., Mossman, J., Kanavos, P.: Health related quality of life aspects not captured by EQ-5D-5L: results from an international survey of patients. Health Policy (New York) 123, 159–165 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2018.12.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Davari, M., Gharibnaseri, Z., Ravanbod, R., et al.: Health status and quality of life in patients with severe hemophilia A: a cross-sectional survey. Hematol Rep 11, 39–42 (2019). https://doi.org/10.4081/hr.2019.7894

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Mackensen, S., Eldar-Lissai, A., Auguste, P., et al.: Measurement properties of the Haem-A-QoL in haemophilia clinical trials. Haemophilia 23, 383–391 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1111/hae.13140

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Tsuchiya, A., et al.: A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Econ 13, 873–884 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.866

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Longworth, L., Bryan, S.: An empirical comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D in liver transplant patients. Health Econ 12, 1061–1067 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.787

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Shah, R.M., Banahan, B.F., 3rd., Holmes, E.R., et al.: An evaluation of the psychometric properties of the sf-12v2 health survey among adults with hemophilia. Health Qual Life Outcomes 16, 229 (2018)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. St-Louis, J., Urajnik, D.J., Ménard, F., et al.: Generic and disease-specific quality of life among youth and young men with hemophilia in Canada. BMC Hematol 16, 13 (2016)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Cunillera, O., Tresserras, R., Rajmil, L., et al.: Discriminative capacity of the EQ-5D, SF-6D, and SF-12 as measures of health status in population health survey. An Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehabil 19, 853–864 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9639-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Petrou, S., Hockley, C.: An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population. Health Econ 14, 1169–1189 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Whitehurst, D.G.T., Bryan, S.: Another study showing that two preference-based measures of health-related quality of life (EQ-5D and SF-6D) are not interchangeable. But why should we expect them to be? Value Health 14, 531–538 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2010.09.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Mulhern, B., Meadows, K.: The construct validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D, SF-6D and diabetes health profile-18 in type 2 diabetes. Health Qual Life Outcomes 12, 42 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-12-42

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Ye, Z., Sun, L., Wang, Q.: A head-to-head comparison of EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D in Chinese patients with low back pain. Health Qual Life Outcomes (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-019-1137-6

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Sakthong, P., Munpan, W.: A head-to-head comparison of UK SF-6D and Thai and UK EQ-5D-5L value sets in Thai patients with chronic diseases. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 15, 669–679 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-017-0320-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Davis, J.C., Liu-Ambrose, T., Khan, K.M., et al.: SF-6D and EQ-5D result in widely divergent incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in a clinical trial of older women: implications for health policy decisions. With Other Metab Bone Dis 23, 1849–1857 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-011-1770-3

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Grosse, S.D., Chaugule, S.S., Hay, J.W.: Estimates of utility weights in hemophilia: implications for cost-utility analysis of clotting factor prophylaxis. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 15, 267–283 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant no. 2016YFC0901500) and the Center for Rare Diseases Research, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China (Grant no. 2016ZX310174-4).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Richard Huan Xu and Dong Dong contributed equally.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China

    Richard Huan Xu, Dong Dong, Eliza Lai-Yi Wong, Yushan Wu & Siyue Yu

  2. Centre for Health Systems and Policy Research, JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China

    Richard Huan Xu, Dong Dong, Eliza Lai-Yi Wong & Yushan Wu

  3. Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore

    Nan Luo

  4. Thrombosis and Hemostasis Center, Institute of Hematology and Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin, China

    Renchi Yang

  5. Beijing Society of Rare Disease Clinical Care and Accessibility, Beijing, China

    Junshuai Liu & Huiqin Yuan

  6. Department of Cardiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China

    Shuyang Zhang

  7. Shenzhen Research Institute, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China

    Dong Dong

Authors
  1. Richard Huan Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dong Dong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nan Luo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Eliza Lai-Yi Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yushan Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Siyue Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Renchi Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Junshuai Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Huiqin Yuan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Shuyang Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Dong Dong or Shuyang Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None declared.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xu, R.H., Dong, D., Luo, N. et al. Evaluating the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D among patients with haemophilia. Eur J Health Econ 22, 547–557 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-021-01273-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-021-01273-5

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation