Top

Quality of Life Research

Gepubliceerd in:

02-12-2021

Validation and comparison of five preference-based measures among age-related macular degeneration patients: evidence from mainland China

Auteurs: Yanhui Si, Shunping Li, Yanjiao Xu, Gang Chen

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 5/2022

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the psychometric properties of five preference-based measures (PBMs) among patients with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) in mainland China, including three health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures [the 15D, the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL)-7D, and EQ-5D-5L] and two capability wellbeing measures [the ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults (ICECAP-A) and ICECAP measure for Older people (ICECAP-O)].

Methods

A convenience sampling framework was used to successively recruit inpatients with AMD who attended a large ophthalmic hospital in Jinan, China. Psychometric properties (known-group validity, concurrent validity, and sensitivity) were assessed. The agreements between PBMs were reported.

Results

A valid sample of 210 AMD inpatients (median duration: 12 months) was analyzed. Overall, the AQoL-7D had the best performance based on the psychometric tests been conducted. Sufficient evidence was found on psychometric properties for other 2 preference-based HRQoL measures. The ICECAP-A outperformed ICECAP-O on known-group validity and concurrent validity whereas opposite results were found on sensitivity. The Bland–Altman plots indicate that there was no pair of PBMs that could be used interchangeably.

Conclusions

The AQoL-7D had shown better psychometric properties than other four PBMs based on Chinese AMD inpatients. The EQ-5D-5L demonstrated sufficient psychometric properties and given the availability of a Chinese-specific tariff and the recommendations of China guidelines for pharmacoeconomic evaluations, it may be prioritized to be used in China. Capability wellbeing instruments could also be considered given they provide information that goes beyond health. Further evidence on responsiveness and reliability for all five PBMs among AMD patients is required.

vorige artikel Measuring symptoms severity in carpal tunnel syndrome: score agreement and responsiveness of the Atroshi-Lyrén 6-item symptoms scale and the Boston symptom severity scale

volgende artikel Development of an observer-reported outcome measure to capture the signs and impact of fever distress symptoms in infants and young children

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Mitchell, P., Liew, G., Gopinath, B., et al. (2018). Age-related macular degeneration. The Lancet, 392(10153), 1147–1159. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31550-2CrossRef

Wong, W. L., Su, X., Li, X., et al. (2014). Global prevalence of age-related macular degeneration and disease burden projection for 2020 and 2040: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Global Health, 2(2), e106-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2214-109x(13)70145-1CrossRefPubMed

Song, P., Du, Y., Chan, K. Y., et al. (2017). The national and subnational prevalence and burden of age-related macular degeneration in China. Journal of Global Health, 7(2), 020703. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.07.020703CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Taylor, D., Hobby, A., Binns, A., et al. (2016). How does age-related macular degeneration affect real-world visual ability and quality of life? A systematic review. British Medical Journal Open, 6, e011504. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011504CrossRef

Senra, H., Macedo, A. F., Nunes, N., et al. (2019). Psychological and psychosocial interventions for depression and anxiety in patients with age-related macular egeneration: A systematic review. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 27(8), 755–773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2019.03.001CrossRefPubMed

Freemantle, N. (1997). Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. BMJ, 315(7109), 689. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.689aCrossRef

Brazier, J., Ara, R., Rowen, D., et al. (2017). A review of generic preference-based measures for use in cost-effectiveness models. PharmacoEconomics, 35(1), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-017-0545-xCrossRefPubMed

EuroQol Group. (1990). EuroQol—A new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy, 16(3), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9CrossRef

Tosh, J., Brazier, J., Evans, P., et al. (2012). A review of generic preference-based measures of health-related quality of life in visual disorders. Value Health, 15(1), 118–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.08.002CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., et al. (2011). Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Quality Life Res, 20(10), 1727–1736. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9903-xCrossRef

11.

Gandhi, M., Ang, M., Teo, K., et al. (2019). EQ-5D-5L is more responsive than EQ-5D-3L to treatment benefit of cataract surgery. Patient, 12(4), 383–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-018-00354-7CrossRefPubMed

12.

Lloyd, A., Nafees, B., Gavriel, S., et al. (2008). Health utility values associated with diabetic retinopathy. Diabetic Medicine, 25(5), 618–624. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2008.02430.xCrossRefPubMed

13.

Hahl, J., Hamalainen, H., Sintonen, H., et al. (2002). Health-related quality of life in type 1 diabetes without or with symptoms of long-term complications. Quality of Life Research, 11(5), 427–436. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015684100227CrossRefPubMed

14.

Sintonen, H. (2001). The 15D instrument of health-related quality of life: Properties and applications. Annals of Medicine, 33(5), 328–336. https://doi.org/10.3109/07853890109002086CrossRefPubMed

15.

Richardson, J., Iezzi, A., Peacock, S., et al. (2012). Utility weights for the vision-related Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL)-7D instrument. Ophthalmic Epidemiology, 19(3), 172–182. https://doi.org/10.3109/09286586.2012.674613CrossRefPubMed

16.

Makai, P., Brouwer, W. B., Koopmanschap, M. A., et al. (2014). Quality of life instruments for economic evaluations in health and social care for older people: A systematic review. Social Science and Medicine, 102, 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.11.050CrossRefPubMed

17.

Coast, J., Flynn, T. N., Natarajan, L., et al. (2008). Valuing the ICECAP capability index for older people. Social Science and Medicine, 67(5), 874–882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.05.015CrossRefPubMed

18.

Al-Janabi, H., Flynn, T. N., & Coast, J. (2012). Development of a self-report measure of capability wellbeing for adults: The ICECAP-A. Quality of Life Research, 21(1), 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9927-2CrossRefPubMed

19.

Amartya. (1999). Commodities and Capabilities. Oxford University Press.

20.

NICE. Developing NICE guidelines: The manual 2014 (April 2017 update)—Incorporating economic evaluation. [PMG20]: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.

21.

Bray, N., Brand, A., Taylor, J., et al. (2017). Portable electronic vision enhancement systems in comparison with optical magnifiers for near vision activities: An economic evaluation alongside a randomized crossover trial. Acta Ophthalmologica, 95(5), e415–e423. https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.13255CrossRefPubMed

22.

Breheny, K., Hollingworth, W., Kandiyali, R., et al. (2020). Assessing the construct validity and responsiveness of Preference-Based Measures (PBMs) in cataract surgery patients. Quality of Life Research, 29(7), 1935–1946. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02443-3CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Combs, R., McAllister, M., Payne, K., et al. (2013). Understanding the impact of genetic testing for inherited retinal dystrophy. European Journal of Human Genetics, 21(11), 1209–1213. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2013.19CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Mitchell, P. M., Caskey, F. J., Scott, J., et al. (2020). Response process validity of three patient reported outcome measures for people requiring kidney care: A think-aloud study using the EQ-5D-5L ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O. British Medical Journal Open, 10(5), e034569. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034569CrossRef

25.

Helter, T. M., Coast, J., Laszewska, A., et al. (2019). Capability instruments in economic evaluations of health-related interventions: A comparative review of the literature. Quality of Life Research, 29(6), 1433–1464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-019-02393-5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Scott, I. U., Schein, O. D., West, S., et al. (1994). Functional status and quality of life measurement among ophthalmic patients. Archives of Ophthalmology, 112(3), 329–335. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.1994.01090150059023CrossRefPubMed

27.

Au Eong, K. G., Chan, E. W., Luo, N., et al. (2012). Validity of EuroQOL-5D, time trade-off, and standard gamble for age-related macular degeneration in the Singapore population. Eye (London, England), 26(3), 379–388. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2011.218CrossRef

28.

Sintonen, H. (1995). The 15-D Measure of Health Related Quality of Life. II Feasibility, Reliability and Validity of its Valuation System. National Centre for Health Program Evaluation, Working Paper 42.

29.

Michel, Y. A., Augestad, L. A., Barra, M., et al. (2019). A Norwegian 15D value algorithm: Proposing a new procedure to estimate 15D value algorithms. Quality of Life Research, 28(5), 1129–1143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-2043-9CrossRefPubMed

30.

Zhang, Y., Sun, J., Pang, Z., et al. (2014). The impact of new screen-detected and previously known type 2 diabetes on health-related quality of life: A population-based study in Qingdao, China. Quality of Life Research, 23(8), 2319–2326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0674-zCrossRefPubMed

31.

Luo, N., Liu, G., Li, M., et al. (2017). Estimating an EQ-5D-5L Value Set for China. Value Health, 20(4), 662–669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.11.016CrossRefPubMed

32.

Flynn, T. N., Huynh, E., Peters, T. J., et al. (2015). Scoring the Icecap—A capability instrument Estimation of a UK general population tariff. Health Economics, 24(3), 258–269. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.3014CrossRefPubMed

33.

Tang, C., Xiong, Y., Wu, H., & Xu, J. (2018). Adaptation and assessments of the Chinese version of the ICECAP-A measurement. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 16(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-0865-3CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Wolffsohn, J. S., & Cochrane, A. L. (2000). Design of the low vision quality-of-life questionnaire (LVQOL) and measuring the outcome of low-vision rehabilitation. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 130(6), 793–802. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9394(00)00610-3CrossRefPubMed

35.

Zou, H., Zhang, X., Xu, X., et al. (2005). Development and psychometric tests of the Chinese-version Low Vision Quality of Life Questionnaire. Quality of Life Research, 14(6), 1633–1639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-004-0026-5CrossRefPubMed

36.

Ma, Y., Huang, J., Zhu, B., et al. (2015). Cataract surgery in patients with bilateral advanced age-related macular degeneration: Measurement of visual acuity and quality of life. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 41(6), 1248–1255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.09.046CrossRefPubMed

37.

Sahel, J. A., Bandello, F., Augustin, A., et al. (2007). Health-related quality of life and utility in patients with age-related macular degeneration. Archives of Ophthalmology, 125(7), 945–951. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.125.7.945CrossRefPubMed

38.

Espallargues, M., Czoski-Murray, C. J., Bansback, N. J., et al. (2005). The impact of age-related macular degeneration on health status utility values. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 46(11), 4016–4023. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.05-0072CrossRef

39.

Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155CrossRefPubMed

40.

Hopkins, W. G. (2002). A new view of statistics. Retrieved December 25, 2020 from http://www.sportsci.org/resou rce/stats/effectmag.html.

41.

Luo, N., Johnson, J. A., Shaw, J. W., et al. (2009). Relative efficiency of the EQ-5D, HUI2, and HUI3 index scores in measuring health burden of chronic medical conditions in a population health survey in the United States. Medical Care, 47(1), 53–60. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e31817d92f8CrossRefPubMed

42.

Zhao, F. L., Yue, M., Yang, H., et al. (2010). Validation and comparison of EuroQol and short form 6D in chronic prostatitis patients. Value Health, 13(5), 649–665. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00728.xCrossRefPubMed

43.

Swets, J. A. (1988). Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science, 240(4857), 1285–1293. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3287615CrossRefPubMed

44.

Garin, O. (2014). Garin O. Ceiling Effect. In: Michalos AC, editor. Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research. Dordrecht: Springer, 631–633. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_296.

45.

Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D., de Boer, M. R., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012CrossRefPubMed

46.

Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1986). Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet, 1(8476), 307–310.CrossRef

47.

Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1999). Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 8(2), 135–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/096228029900800204CrossRefPubMed

48.

Alanne, S., Roine, R. P., Räsänen, P., et al. (2014). Estimating the minimum important change in the 15D scores. Quality of Life Research, 24(3), 599–606. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0787-4CrossRefPubMed

49.

Kvam, A. K., Fayers, P. M., & Wisloff, F. (2011). Responsiveness and minimal important score differences in quality-of-life questionnaires: A comparison of the EORTC QLQ-C30 cancer-specific questionnaire to the generic utility questionnaires EQ-5D and 15D in patients with multiple myeloma. European Journal of Haematology, 87(4), 330–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0609.2011.01665.xCrossRefPubMed

50.

Pickles, K., Lancsar, E., Seymour, J., et al. (2019). Accounts from developers of generic health state utility instruments explain why they produce different QALYs: A qualitative study. Social Science and Medicine, 240, 112560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112560CrossRefPubMed

51.

Coast, J., Smith, R., & Lorgelly, P. (2008). Should the capability approach be applied in Health Economics? Health Economics, 17(6), 667–670. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1359CrossRefPubMed

52.

Wormald, R., Evans, J., Smeeth, L., et al. (2005). Photodynamic therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002030.pub2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

53.

Armbrecht, A. M., Aspinall, P. A., & Dhillon, B. (2004). A prospective study of visual function and quality of life following PDT in patients with wet age related macular degeneration. The British Journal of Ophthalmology, 88(10), 1270–1273. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2003.038604CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

54.

Chen, G., Ratcliffe, J., Kaambwa, B., et al. (2018). Empirical comparison between capability and two health-related quality of life measures. Social Indicators Research, 140(1), 175–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1788-9CrossRef

55.

Liu, G. (2020). China Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations Chinese-English Version. China Market Press.

56.

Luo, N., Wang, X., Ang, M., et al. (2015). A vision, “Bolt-On” item could increase the discriminatory power of the EQ-5D Index Score. Value Health, 18(8), 1037–1042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.08.002CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Validation and comparison of five preference-based measures among age-related macular degeneration patients: evidence from mainland China
Auteurs: Yanhui Si
Shunping Li
Yanjiao Xu
Gang Chen
Publicatiedatum: 02-12-2021
Uitgeverij: Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 5/2022
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03047-1

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 5/2022

Joint modelling with competing risks of dropout for longitudinal analysis of health-related quality of life in cancer clinical trials

The QALY is ableist: on the unethical implications of health states worse than dead

Family quality of life for families of children with disabilities in African contexts: a scoping review

Measuring health-related quality of life in young children with physical illness: psychometric properties of the parent-reported KIDSCREEN-27

The impact of poor medication knowledge on health-related quality of life in people with Parkinson’s disease: a mediation analysis

Health-related quality of life among elderly breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy: a U.S Medicare population-based study