Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 9/2018

16-05-2018

Validity of the EQ–5D–5L and reference norms for the Spanish population

Auteurs: Gimena Hernandez, Olatz Garin, Yolanda Pardo, Gemma Vilagut, Àngels Pont, Mónica Suárez, Montse Neira, Luís Rajmil, Inigo Gorostiza, Yolanda Ramallo-Fariña, Juan Cabases, Jordi Alonso, Montse Ferrer

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 9/2018

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
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Background and objective

The EuroQol 5 dimensions 5 levels (EQ–5D–5L) is the new version of EQ–5D, developed to improve its discriminatory capacity. This study aims to evaluate the construct validity of the Spanish version and provide index and dimension population-based reference norms for the new EQ–5D–5L.

Methods

Data were obtained from the 2011/2012 Spanish National Health Survey, with a representative sample (n = 20,587) of non-institutionalized Spanish adults (≥ 18 years). The EQ–5D–5L index was calculated by using the Spanish value set. Construct validity was evaluated by comparing known groups with estimators obtained through regression models, adjusted by age and gender. Sampling weights were applied to restore the representativeness of the sample and to calculate the norms stratified by gender and age groups. We calculated the percentages and standard errors of dimensions, and the deciles, percentiles 5 and 95, means, and 95% confidence intervals of the health index.

Results

All the hypotheses established a priori for known groups were confirmed (P < 0.001). The EQ–5D–5L index indicated worse health in groups with lower education level (from 0.94 to 0.87), higher number of chronic conditions (0.96–0.79), probable psychiatric disorder (0.94 vs 0.80), strong limitations (0.96–0.46), higher number of days of restriction (0.93–0.64) or confinement to bed (0.92–0.49), and hospitalized in the previous 12 months (0.92 vs 0.81).

Conclusions

The EQ–5D–5L is a valid instrument to measure perceived health in the Spanish-speaking population. The representative population-based norms provided here will help improve the interpretation of results obtained with the new EQ–5D–5L.
vorige artikel Effects of substance use screening and brief intervention on health-related quality of life
volgende artikel SF-6D population norms for the Hong Kong Chinese general population
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
Mishoe, S. C., & Maclean, J. R. (2001). Assessment of health-related quality of life. Respiratory Care, 46, 1236–1257.PubMed
2.
Vodicka, E., Kim, K., Devine, E. B., Gnanasakthy, A., Scoggins, J. F., & Patrick, D. L. (2015). Inclusion of patient-reported outcome measures in registered clinical trials: Evidence from ClinicalTrials.gov (2007–2013). Contemporary Clinical Trials, 43, 1–9.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Brooks, R., & The EuroQol Group (1996). EuroQol: The current state of play. Health Policy, 37, 53–72.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Bharmal, M., & Thomas, J. III (2006). Comparing the EQ-5D and the SF-6D descriptive systems to assess their ceiling effects in the US general population. Value in Health, 9, 262–271.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Hinz, A., Klaiberg, A., Brahler, E., & Konig, H. H. (2006). The Quality of Life Questionnaire EQ-5D: Modelling and norm values for the general population. Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik, Medizinische Psychologie, 56, 42–48.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Xin, Y., & McIntosh, E. (2017). Assessment of the construct validity and responsiveness of preference-based quality of life measures in people with Parkinson’s: A systematic review. Quality of Life Research, 26, 1–23.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Fransen, M., & Edmonds, J. (1999). Reliability and validity of the EuroQol in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Rheumatology, 38, 807–813.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Krahn, M., Bremner, K. E., Tomlinson, G., Ritvo, P., Irvine, J., & Naglie, G. (2007). Responsiveness of disease-specific and generic utility instruments in prostate cancer patients. Quality of Life Research, 16, 509–522.CrossRefPubMed
9.
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, 275–284.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Feng, Y., Devlin, N., & Herdman, M. (2015). Assessing the health of the general population in England: How do the three- and five-level versions of EQ-5D compare? Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 13, 171.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Janssen, M. F., Pickard, A. S., Golicki, D., Gudex, C., Niewada, M., Scalone, L., et al. (2013). Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: A multi-country study. Quality of Life Research, 22, 1717–1727.CrossRefPubMed
12.
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, 1065–1073.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Pickard, A. S., De Leon, 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, 259–263.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Jia, Y. X., Cui, F. Q., Li, L., Zhang, D. L., Zhang, G. M., Wang, F. Z., et al. (2014). Comparison between the EQ-5D-5L and the EQ-5D-3L in patients with hepatitis B. Quality of Life Research, 23, 2355–2363.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Kim, T. H., Jo, M. W., Lee, S. I., Kim, S. H., & Chung, S. M. (2013). Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in the general population of South Korea. Quality of Life Research, 22, 2245–2253.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Scalone, L., Ciampichini, R., Fagiuoli, S., Gardini, I., Fusco, F., Gaeta, L., et al. (2013). Comparing the performance of the standard EQ-5D 3L with the new version EQ-5D 5L in patients with chronic hepatic diseases. Quality of Life Research, 22, 1707–1716.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Cunillera, O., Tresserras, R., Rajmil, L., Vilagut, G., Brugulat, P., Herdman, M., et al. (2010). Discriminative capacity of the EQ-5D, SF-6D, and SF-12 as measures of health status in population health survey. Quality of Life Research, 19, 853–864.CrossRefPubMed
18.
19.
Aaronson, N., Alonso, J., Burnam, A., Lohr, K. N., Patrick, D. L., Perrin, E., et al. (2002). Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria. Quality of Life Research, 11, 193–205.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Alonso, J., Regidor, E., Barrio, G., Prieto, L., Rodriguez, C., & de la Fuente, L (1998). Population reference values of the Spanish version of the Health Questionnaire SF-36. Medicina Clinica, 111, 410–416.PubMed
21.
Vilagut, G., Valderas, J. M., Ferrer, M., Garin, O., Lopez-Garcia, E., & Alonso, J. (2008). Interpretation of SF-36 and SF-12 questionnaires in Spain: Physical and mental components. Medicina Clinica, 130, 726–735.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Ravens-Sieberer, U., Herdman, M., Devine, J., Otto, C., Bullinger, M., Rose, M., et al. (2014). The European KIDSCREEN approach to measure quality of life and well-being in children: Development, current application, and future advances. Quality of Life Research, 23, 791–803.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Schmidt, S., & Pardo, Y. (2014). Normative data. In A. C. Michalos (Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research (pp. 4375–4379). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRef
24.
Szende, A., Janssen, B., & Cabases, J. (2014). Self-reported population health: An international perspective based on EQ-5D. Dordrecht: SpringerOpen.CrossRef
25.
Konig, H. H., Bernert, S., Angermeyer, M. C., Matschinger, H., Martinez, M., Vilagut, G., et al. (2009). Comparison of population health status in six european countries: Results of a representative survey using the EQ-5D questionnaire. Medical Care, 47, 255–261.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Garcia-Gordillo, M. A., Adsuar, J. C., & Olivares, P. R. (2016). Normative values of EQ-5D-5L: In a Spanish representative population sample from Spanish Health Survey, 2011. Quality of Life Research, 25, 1313–1321.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Ramos-Goñi, J. M., Craig, B. M., Oppe, M., Ramallo-Fariña, Y., Pinto-Prades, J. L., Luo, N., et al. (2018). Handling data quality issues to estimate the Spanish EQ-5D-5L value set using a hybrid interval regression approach. Value in Health, 21(5), 596–604.CrossRefPubMed
28.
29.
30.
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, 1727–1736.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Oppe, M., Devlin, N. J., van Hout, B., Krabbe, P. F., & de Charro, F. (2014). A program of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value in Health, 17, 445–453.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Oppe, M., Rand-Hendriksen, K., Shah, K., Ramos-Goni, J. M., & Luo, N. (2016). EuroQol protocols for time trade-off valuation of health outcomes. Pharmacoeconomics, 34, 993–1004.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Gispert, R., Rajmil, L., Schiaffino, A., & Herdman, M. (2003). Sociodemographic and health-related correlates of psychiatric distress in a general population. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 38, 677–683.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Goldberg, D. P., & Williams, P. (1988). A user’s guide to the General Health Questionnaire. London: Institute of Psychiatry.
35.
van Oyen, H., Van der Heyden, J., Perenboom, R., & Jagger, C. (2006). Monitoring population disability: Evaluation of a new Global Activity Limitation Indicator (GALI). Sozial-Und Praventivmedizin, 51, 153–161.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Schmidt, S., Vilagut, G., Garin, O., Cunillera, O., Tresserras, R., Brugulat, P., et al. (2012). Reference guidelines for the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey version 2 based on the Catalan general population. Medicina Clinica, 139, 613–625.CrossRefPubMed
37.
McClure, N. S., Sayah, F. A., Xie, F., Luo, N., & Johnson, J. A. (2017). Instrument-defined estimates of the minimally important difference for EQ-5D-5L index scores. Value in Health, 20, 644–650.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Hopman, W. M., Towheed, T., Anastassiades, T., Tenenhouse, A., Poliquin, S., Berger, C., et al. (2000). Canadian normative data for the SF-36 health survey. Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study Research Group. CMAJ, 163, 265–271.PubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Burstrom, K., Johannesson, M., & Diderichsen, F. (2001). Swedish population health-related quality of life results using the EQ-5D. Quality of Life Research, 10, 621–635.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Michelson, H., Bolund, C., Nilsson, B., & Brandberg, Y. (2000). Health-related quality of life measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30—Reference values from a large sample of Swedish population. Acta Oncologica, 39, 477–484.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Power, M., Quinn, K., & Schmidt, S. (2005). Development of the WHOQOL-old module. Quality of Life Research, 14, 2197–2214.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Hinz, A., Kohlmann, T., Stobel-Richter, Y., Zenger, M., & Brahler, E. (2014). The quality of life questionnaire EQ-5D-5L: Psychometric properties and normative values for the general German population. Quality of Life Research, 23, 443–447.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Craig, B. M., Pickard, A. S., & Lubetkin, E. I. (2014). Health problems are more common, but less severe when measured using newer EQ-5D versions. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67, 93–99.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Golicki, D., & Niewada, M. (2017). EQ-5D-5L Polish population norms. Archives of Medical Science, 13, 191–200.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Burstrom, K., Johannesson, M., & Rehnberg, C. (2007). Deteriorating health status in Stockholm 1998–2002: Results from repeated population surveys using the EQ-5D. Quality of Life Research, 16, 1547–1553.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Badia, X., Schiaffino, A., Alonso, J., & Herdman, M. (1998). Using the EuroQoI 5-D in the Catalan general population: Feasibility and construct validity. Quality of Life Research, 7, 311–322.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Puhan, M. A., Ahuja, A., Van Natta, M. L., Ackatz, L. E., & Meinert, C. (2011). Interviewer versus self-administered health-related quality of life questionnaires—Does it matter? Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 9, 30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metagegevens
Titel
Validity of the EQ–5D–5L and reference norms for the Spanish population
Auteurs
Gimena Hernandez
Olatz Garin
Yolanda Pardo
Gemma Vilagut
Àngels Pont
Mónica Suárez
Montse Neira
Luís Rajmil
Inigo Gorostiza
Yolanda Ramallo-Fariña
Juan Cabases
Jordi Alonso
Montse Ferrer
Publicatiedatum
16-05-2018
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 9/2018
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1877-5

Andere artikelen Uitgave 9/2018

Quality of Life Research 9/2018 Naar de uitgave

OriginalPaper

Utility elicitation in adults and children for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and associated health states

OriginalPaper

Changes in health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) dimensions associated with community-based musculoskeletal physiotherapy: a multi-centre analysis

OriginalPaper

What is the current evidence of the impact on quality of life whilst waiting for management/treatment of orthopaedic/musculoskeletal complaints? A systematic scoping review

OriginalPaper

Trajectory of health-related quality of life and its determinants in patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery: a 1-year longitudinal study

Brief Communication

The impact of axial spondyloarthritis on quality of life (QoL): a comparison with the impact of moderate to end-stage chronic kidney disease on QoL

OriginalPaper

Grooming a CAT: customizing CAT administration rules to increase response efficiency in specific research and clinical settings