Skip to main content
main-content
Top

Tip

Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 7/2016

01-07-2016

The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Korea

Auteurs: Seon-Ha Kim, Jeonghoon Ahn, Minsu Ock, Sangjin Shin, Jooyeon Park, Nan Luo, Min-Woo Jo

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 7/2016

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to estimate Korean preference weights for EQ-5D-5L based on values elicited from Korean population by applying the EuroQol Valuation Technology (EQ-VT) program and the standard protocol by the EuroQol Group.

Methods

The multistage quota sampling method was used to recruit 1085 subjects from the general population in Korea. Each respondent valuated 10 health states using the composite time trade-off (cTTO) and 7 health states using discrete choice experiment. The EQ-VT program was developed by the EuroQol Group and translated into Korean with the Korean research team. Computer-assisted, face-to-face interviews were conducted. A range of predictive models were explored using cTTO. The most appropriate model was determined after assessing goodness of fit, logical consistency, and parsimony.

Results

Of 3206 contacted, 1085 subjects completed interviews (33.8 %) and 1080 were used for modeling. A model with dummy variables for each level of severity and dimension and a term that picked up whether any dimension in the state was at level 4 or 5 was selected as the best predictive model. All coefficients of the final model were statistically significant and logically consistent. In addition, it was parsimonious. This model had mean absolute error of 0.027, and the absolute error for all 86 health states was below 0.1.

Conclusions

The final model built in this study appears to predict the utilities of the states which were valuated directly. This model could be used to interpolate quality weights for all EQ-5D-5L health states.
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
go back to reference Dolan, P., Gudex, C., Kind, P., & Williams, A. (1996). Valuing health states: A comparison of methods. Journal of Health Economics, 15(2), 209–231. CrossRefPubMed Dolan, P., Gudex, C., Kind, P., & Williams, A. (1996). Valuing health states: A comparison of methods. Journal of Health Economics, 15(2), 209–231. CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Torrance, G. W. (1986). Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. Journal of Health Economics, 5(1), 1–30. CrossRefPubMed Torrance, G. W. (1986). Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. Journal of Health Economics, 5(1), 1–30. CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Torrance, G. W., Feeny, D. H., Furlong, W. J., Barr, R. D., Zhang, Y., & Wang, Q. (1996). Multiattribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system. Health Utilities Index Mark 2. Medical Care, 34(7), 702–722. CrossRefPubMed Torrance, G. W., Feeny, D. H., Furlong, W. J., Barr, R. D., Zhang, Y., & Wang, Q. (1996). Multiattribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system. Health Utilities Index Mark 2. Medical Care, 34(7), 702–722. CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Feeny, D., Furlong, W., Torrance, G. W., Goldsmith, C. H., Zhu, Z., DePauw, S., et al. (2002). Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system. Medical Care, 40(2), 113–128. CrossRefPubMed Feeny, D., Furlong, W., Torrance, G. W., Goldsmith, C. H., Zhu, Z., DePauw, S., et al. (2002). Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system. Medical Care, 40(2), 113–128. CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Brazier, J., Roberts, J., & Deverill, M. (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics, 21(2), 271–292. CrossRefPubMed Brazier, J., Roberts, J., & Deverill, M. (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics, 21(2), 271–292. CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Norman, R., Cronin, P., Viney, R., King, M., Street, D., & Ratcliffe, J. (2009). International comparisons in valuing EQ-5D health states: A review and analysis. Value in Health, 12(8), 1194–1200. CrossRefPubMed Norman, R., Cronin, P., Viney, R., King, M., Street, D., & Ratcliffe, J. (2009). International comparisons in valuing EQ-5D health states: A review and analysis. Value in Health, 12(8), 1194–1200. CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Jo, M. W., Yun, S. C., & Lee, S. I. (2008). Estimating quality weights for EQ-5D health states with the time trade-off method in South Korea. Value in Health, 11(7), 1186–1189. CrossRefPubMed Jo, M. W., Yun, S. C., & Lee, S. I. (2008). Estimating quality weights for EQ-5D health states with the time trade-off method in South Korea. Value in Health, 11(7), 1186–1189. CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Lee, Y. K., Nam, H. S., Chuang, L. H., Kim, K. Y., Yang, H. K., Kwon, I. S., et al. (2009). South Korean time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states: Modeling with observed values for 101 health states. Value in Health, 12(8), 1187–1193. CrossRefPubMed Lee, Y. K., Nam, H. S., Chuang, L. H., Kim, K. Y., Yang, H. K., Kwon, I. S., et al. (2009). South Korean time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states: Modeling with observed values for 101 health states. Value in Health, 12(8), 1187–1193. CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., Janssen, M., Kind, P., Parkin, D., et al. (2011). Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Quality of Life Research, 20(10), 1727–1736. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., Janssen, M., Kind, P., Parkin, D., et al. (2011). Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Quality of Life Research, 20(10), 1727–1736. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Kim, S. H., Kim, H. J., Lee, S. I., & Jo, M. W. (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. CrossRefPubMed Kim, S. H., Kim, H. J., Lee, S. I., & Jo, M. W. (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. CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Pickard, A. S., DeLeon, 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. CrossRefPubMed Pickard, A. S., DeLeon, 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. CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference 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. CrossRefPubMed 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. CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Oppe, M., Devlin, N. J., van Hout, B., Krabbe, P. F., & de Charro, F. (2014). A programme of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value in Health, 17(4), 445–453. CrossRefPubMed Oppe, M., Devlin, N. J., van Hout, B., Krabbe, P. F., & de Charro, F. (2014). A programme of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value in Health, 17(4), 445–453. CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Devlin, N. J., Tsuchiya, A., Buckingham, K., & Tilling, C. (2011). A uniform Time Trade Off method for states better and worse than dead: Feasibility study of the ‘lead time’ approach. Health Economics, 20(3), 348–361. CrossRefPubMed Devlin, N. J., Tsuchiya, A., Buckingham, K., & Tilling, C. (2011). A uniform Time Trade Off method for states better and worse than dead: Feasibility study of the ‘lead time’ approach. Health Economics, 20(3), 348–361. CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Ramos-Goni, J. M., Pinto-Prades, J. L., Oppe, M., Cabases, J. M., Serrano-Aguilar, P., & Rivero-Arias, O. (2014). Valuation and modeling of EQ-5D-5L health states using a hybrid approach. Medical Care. doi: 10.​1097/​MLR.​0000000000000283​. Ramos-Goni, J. M., Pinto-Prades, J. L., Oppe, M., Cabases, J. M., Serrano-Aguilar, P., & Rivero-Arias, O. (2014). Valuation and modeling of EQ-5D-5L health states using a hybrid approach. Medical Care. doi: 10.​1097/​MLR.​0000000000000283​.
17.
go back to reference Badia, X., Roset, M., & Herdman, M. (1999). Inconsistent responses in three preference-elicitation methods for health states. Social Science and Medicine, 49(7), 943–950. CrossRefPubMed Badia, X., Roset, M., & Herdman, M. (1999). Inconsistent responses in three preference-elicitation methods for health states. Social Science and Medicine, 49(7), 943–950. CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference 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. CrossRefPubMed 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. CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Dolan, P. (1997). Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Medical Care, 35(11), 1095–1108. CrossRefPubMed Dolan, P. (1997). Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Medical Care, 35(11), 1095–1108. CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Dolan, P., Gudex, C., Kind, P., & Williams, A. (1996). The time trade-off method: Results from a general population study. Health Economics, 5(2), 141–154. CrossRefPubMed Dolan, P., Gudex, C., Kind, P., & Williams, A. (1996). The time trade-off method: Results from a general population study. Health Economics, 5(2), 141–154. CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Kind, P., Brooks, R., & Rabin, R. (Eds.). (2005). EQ-5D concepts and method. Dordrecht: Springer. Kind, P., Brooks, R., & Rabin, R. (Eds.). (2005). EQ-5D concepts and method. Dordrecht: Springer.
23.
go back to reference Norman, R., Cronin, P., & Viney, R. (2013). A pilot discrete choice experiment to explore preferences for EQ-5D-5L health states. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 11(3), 287–298. CrossRefPubMed Norman, R., Cronin, P., & Viney, R. (2013). A pilot discrete choice experiment to explore preferences for EQ-5D-5L health states. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 11(3), 287–298. CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Walters, S. J., & Brazier, J. E. (2005). Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Quality of Life Research, 14(6), 1523–1532. CrossRefPubMed Walters, S. J., & Brazier, J. E. (2005). Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Quality of Life Research, 14(6), 1523–1532. CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Shaw, J. W., Johnson, J. A., & Coons, S. J. (2005). US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: Development and testing of the D1 valuation model. Medical Care, 43(3), 203–220. CrossRefPubMed Shaw, J. W., Johnson, J. A., & Coons, S. J. (2005). US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: Development and testing of the D1 valuation model. Medical Care, 43(3), 203–220. CrossRefPubMed
Metagegevens
Titel
The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Korea
Auteurs
Seon-Ha Kim
Jeonghoon Ahn
Minsu Ock
Sangjin Shin
Jooyeon Park
Nan Luo
Min-Woo Jo
Publicatiedatum
01-07-2016
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 7/2016
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1205-2