Abstract
Purpose The measurement properties of the EQ-5D have not been explored for patients with traumatic limb injuries. The purpose of this study was to examine the construct validity, predictive validity, and responsiveness of the EQ-5D in patients with traumatic limb injuries. Methods A consecutive cohort of 1,167 patients was assessed with the EQ-5D and the World Health Organization Quality of Life instrument (WHOQOL-BREF) at baseline while the patients were hospitalized because of the injury, and the patients were followed up at 3 months (1,003 patients), 6 months (1,010 patients), and 12 months (987 patients) after injury via telephone interview. Results The utility and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of the EQ-5D had moderate to high association with the physical and psychological domains and the two general questions (overall QOL and overall health) of the WHOQOL-BREF at all time points except baseline (Pearson’s correlation coefficient >0.3), but the EQ-5D profiles were weakly associated with the social and environment domains of the WHOQOL-BREF (absolute value of Spearman’s correlation coefficient <0.3). These results indicate that the EQ-5D has satisfactory construct validity. The utility and VAS scores of the EQ-5D at 3 and 6 months after injury can predict (with moderate to large relationships) the four domains and two general questions of the WHOQOL-BREF administered at 12 months after injury. The responsiveness of the utility and VAS of the EQ-5D were high (effect sizes >0.9) at 0–3, 0–6, and 0–12 months after injury. Conclusions The EQ-5D has sufficient construct validity, predictive validity, and responsiveness, and also provides evidence for using the utility of the EQ-5D for cost-utility analyses of patients with traumatic limb injuries in the future.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
EuroQol–a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16(3):199–208.
Gold M, Siegel J, Russel L, Weinstein M. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.
Drummond MF, O’Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. UK: Oxford University Press; 1997.
Rasanen P, Roine E, Sintonen H, Semberg-Konttinen V, Ryynanen OP, Roine R. Use of quality-adjusted life years for the estimation of effectiveness of health care: a systematic literature review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006;22(2):235–41.
Food and Drug Administration. Guidance to the industry patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Food and Drug Administration; 2009.
van de Willige G, Wiersma D, Nienhuis FJ, Jenner JA. Changes in quality of life in chronic psychiatric patients: a comparison between EuroQol (EQ-5D) and WHOQoL. Qual Life Res. 2005;14(2):441–51.
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):1205–16.
Konig HH, Born A, Gunther O, Matschinger H, Heinrich S, Riedel-Heller SG, et al. 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.
Konig 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):177–87.
Schweikert B, Hahmann H, Leidl R. Validation of the EuroQol questionnaire in cardiac rehabilitation. Heart. 2006;92(1):62–7.
Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Kollen BJ, Lankhorst GJ. Predicting disability in stroke—a critical review of the literature. Age Ageing. 1996;25(6):479–89.
Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(7):737–45.
Chern JS, Chen MH, Lee Y C, Chen SS, Lin LF, Hou WH, et al. Validation of a Chinese version of the Frenchay Activities Index in patients with traumatic limb injury. J Occup Rehabil, Journal. 2013; doi:10.1007/s10926-013-9477-2.
Hou WH, Liang HW, Hsieh CL, Sheu CF, Hwang JS, Chuang HY. Integrating health-related quality of life with sickness leave days for return-to-work assessment in traumatic limb injuries. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(9):2307–14.
Hou WH, Sheu CF, Liang HW, Hsieh CL, Lee Y, Chuang HY, et al. Trajectories and predictors of return to work after traumatic limb injury—a 2-year follow-up study. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2012;38(5):456–66.
Hou WH, Liang HW, Sheu CF, Hsieh CL, Chuang HY. Return to work and quality of life in workers with traumatic limb injuries: a 2-year repeated-measurements study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94(4):703–10.
Szende A, Oppe M, Devlin N. EQ-5D value sets: inventory, comparative review and user guide. EuroQol Group; 2007.
Chang TJ, Tarn YH, Hsieh CL, Liou WS, Shaw JW, Chiou XG. Taiwanese version of the EQ-5D: validation in a representative sample of the Taiwanese population. J Formos Med Assoc. 2007;106(12):1023–31.
Lee HY, Hung MC, Hu FC, Chang YY, Hsieh CL, Wang JD. Estimating quality weights for EQ-5D (EuroQol-5 dimensions) health states with the time trade-off method in Taiwan. J Formos Med Assoc. 2013;112(11):699–706.
Lin SY, Kerse N, McLean C, Moyes SA. Validation of quality of life and functional measures for older people for telephone administration. J Prim Health Care. 2010;2(1):35–42.
Yao G, Chung CW, Yu CF, Wang JD. Development and verification of validity and reliability of the WHOQOL-BREF Taiwan version. J Formos Med Assoc. 2002;101(5):342–51.
Chiu WT, Huang SJ, Hwang HF, Tsauo JY, Chen CF, Tsai SH, et al. Use of the WHOQOL-BREF for evaluating persons with traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma. 2006;23(11):1609–20.
Jang Y, Hsieh CL, Wang YH, Wu YH. A validity study of the WHOQOL-BREF assessment in persons with traumatic spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85(11):1890–5.
Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. New York: Academic Press; 1988.
Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53(5):459–68.
Yu WH, Chen KL, Chou YT, Hsueh IP, Hsieh CL. Responsiveness and predictive validity of the hierarchical balance short forms in people with stroke. Phys Ther. 2013;93(6):798–808.
Pickard AS, Johnson JA, Feeny DH. Responsiveness of generic health-related quality of life measures in stroke. Qual Life Res. 2005;14(1):207–19.
van Hartingsveld F, Ostelo RW, Cuijpers P, de Vos R, Riphagen II, de Vet HC. Treatment-related and patient-related expectations of patients with musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review of published measurement tools. Clin J Pain. 2010;26(6):470–88.
Furlan JC, Fehlings MG, Tator CH, Davis AM. Motor and sensory assessment of patients in clinical trials for pharmacological therapy of acute spinal cord injury: psychometric properties of the ASIA Standards. J Neurotrauma. 2008;25(11):1273–301.
Acknowledgments
The study was supported by research grants from the National Science Council (NSC-99-2314-B-650-001-MY2, NSC-101-2314-B-038-055, and NSC 102-2314-B-006-029-MY2).
Conflict of interest
All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Ching-Lin Hsieh and Mei-Chuan Hung have contributed equally to this article.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hung, MC., Lu, WS., Chen, SS. et al. Validation of the EQ-5D in Patients with Traumatic Limb Injury. J Occup Rehabil 25, 387–393 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-014-9547-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-014-9547-0