Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-012-0189-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a validated 12-item measure of knee replacement outcomes. An algorithm to estimate EQ-5D utilities from OKS would facilitate cost-utility analysis on studies analyses using OKS but not generic health state preference measures. We estimate mapping (or cross-walking) models that predict EQ-5D utilities and/or responses based on OKS. We also compare different model specifications and assess whether different datasets yield different mapping algorithms.
Models were estimated using data from the Knee Arthroplasty Trial and the UK Patient Reported Outcome Measures dataset, giving a combined estimation dataset of 134,269 questionnaires from 81,213 knee replacement patients and an internal validation dataset of 45,213 questionnaires from 27,397 patients. The best model was externally validated on registry data (10,002 observations from 4,505 patients) from the South West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre. Eight models of the relationship between OKS and EQ-5D were evaluated, including ordinary least squares, generalized linear models, two-part models, three-part models and response mapping.
A multinomial response mapping model using OKS responses to predict EQ-5D response levels had best prediction accuracy, with two-part and three-part models also performing well. In the external validation sample, this model had a mean squared error of 0.033 and a mean absolute error of 0.129. Relative model performance, coefficients and predictions differed slightly but significantly between the two estimation datasets.
The resulting response mapping algorithm can be used to predict EQ-5D utilities and responses from OKS responses. Response mapping appears to perform particularly well in large datasets.
Supplementary material 1 (XLSX 3112 kb)11136_2012_189_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx
Williams, A. (1995). The measurement and valuation of health: A chronicle. The University of York discussion paper 136.
Szende, A., & Williams, A. (2004). Measuring self-reported population health: An international perspective based on EQ-5D. Rotterdam, Netherlands: EuroQol group.
Rasanen, P., Roine, E., Sintonen, H., Semberg-Konttinen, V., Ryynanen, O. P., & Roine, R. (2006). Use of quality-adjusted life years for the estimation of effectiveness of health care: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 22(2), 235–241. PubMedCrossRef
Szende, A., Oppe, M., & Devlin, N. (2007). EQ-5D value sets: Inventory, comparative review and user guide. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. CrossRef
Longworth, L., Rowen, D. (2011). NICE DSU technical support document 10: The use of mapping methods to estimate health state utility values. Report by the decision support unit. Sheffield: Decision Support Unit, ScHARR, University of Sheffield. http://www.nicedsu.org.uk/TSD%2010%20mapping%20FINAL_forthcoming.pdf. Accessed 23 August 2011.
Tsuchiya A., Brazier J., McColl E., Parkin D. (2002). Deriving preference-based single indices from non-preference based condition-specific instruments: Converting AQLQ into EQ5D indices. Sheffield Health Economics Group discussion paper series 02/1.
Dawson, J., Fitzpatrick, R., Murray, D., & Carr, A. (1998). Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume, 80(1), 63–69. CrossRef
Isis Outcomes. (2011). The Oxford Knee Score.
Murray, D. W., Fitzpatrick, R., Rogers, K., Pandit, H., Beard, D. J., Carr, A. J., et al. (2007). The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume, 89(8), 1010–1014. CrossRef
Dakin H. A., Gray A., Murray D., Fitzpatrick R. (2012). Rationing of total knee replacement: Cost-effectiveness evidence from a pragmatic randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open, 2(1), e000332.
Hospital Episode Statistics. (2011). Provisional monthly patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in England: A guide to PROMs methodology. http://www.hesonline.nhs.uk/Ease/servlet/ContentServer?siteID=1937&categoryID=1583. Accessed 23 August 2011.
Hospital Episode Statistics. (2010). Provisional monthly patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in England. April 2009–April 2010: Pre- and postoperative data: Experimental statistics.
Rothwell, A. G., Hooper, G. J., Hobbs, A., & Frampton, C. M. (2010). An analysis of the Oxford hip and knee scores and their relationship to early joint revision in the New Zealand Joint Registry. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume, 92(3), 413–418. CrossRef
Hadfield S. G., Alazzawi S., Bardakos N. V., Field R. E. (2011). Monitoring clinical and patient reported outcomes for hip and knee replacement surgery, and their application to improving practice. Presented at the Health Services Research Network (HSRN) and Service Delivery and Organisation (SDO) Network joint annual conference, 7th–8th June 2011, Liverpool UK.
StataCorp. (2009). Suest—seemingly unrelated estimation. Stata Base Reference Manual: Release 11 (pp. 1800–1818). College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.
Eriksson L., Johansson E., Kettaneh-Wold N., Trygg J., Wikström C., Wold S. (2006). Appendix I: Model derivation, interpretation and validation. Multi- and megavariate data analysis Part 1: Basic principles and applications (2nd ed., pp. 372–378). Umea, Sweden: MKS Umetrics AB.
- Mapping analyses to estimate EQ-5D utilities and responses based on Oxford Knee Score
- Springer Netherlands