Literature DB >> 16224300

Self-reported health status of the general adult U.S. population as assessed by the EQ-5D and Health Utilities Index.

Nan Luo1, Jeffrey A Johnson, James W Shaw, David Feeny, Stephen Joel Coons.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the self-reported health status of the general adult U.S. population using 3 multi-attribute preference-based measures: the EQ-5D, Health Utilities Index Mark 2 (HUI2), and Mark 3 (HUI3).
METHODS: We surveyed the general adult U.S. population using a probability sample with oversampling of Hispanics and non-Hispanic blacks. Respondents to this home-visit survey self-completed the EQ-5D and HUI2/3 questionnaires. Overall health index scores of the target population and selected subgroups were estimated and construct validity of these measures was assessed by testing a priori hypotheses.
RESULTS: Completed questionnaires were collected from 4048 respondents (response rate: 59.4%). The majority of the respondents were women (52.0%); the mean age of the sample was 45 years, with 14.8% being 65 or older. Index scores (standard errors) for the general adult U.S. population as assessed by the EQ-5D, HUI2, and HUI3 were 0.87 (0.01), 0.86 (0.01), and 0.81 (0.01), respectively. Generally, younger, male and Hispanic or non-Hispanic black adults had higher (better) index scores than older, female and other racial/ethnic adults; index scores were higher with higher educational attainment and household income. The 3 overall preference indices were strongly correlated (Pearson's r: 0.67-0.87), but systematically different, with intraclass correlation coefficients between these indices ranging from 0.59 to 0.77.
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides U.S. population norms for self-reported health status on the EQ-5D, HUI2, and HUI3. Although these measures appeared to be valid and demonstrated similarities, health status assessed by these measures is not exactly the same.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16224300     DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000182493.57090.c1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  156 in total

1.  Population norms for the EQ-5D index scores using Singapore preference weights.

Authors:  Edimansyah Abdin; Mythily Subramaniam; Janhavi Ajit Vaingankar; Nan Luo; Siow Ann Chong
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 2.  Utility scores for different health states related to depression: individual participant data analysis.

Authors:  Spyros Kolovos; Judith E Bosmans; Johanna M van Dongen; Birre van Esveld; Dorcas Magai; Annemieke van Straten; Christina van der Feltz-Cornelis; Kirsten M van Steenbergen-Weijenburg; Klaas M Huijbregts; Harm van Marwijk; Heleen Riper; Maurits W van Tulder
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-03-04       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Discriminative capacity of the EQ-5D, SF-6D, and SF-12 as measures of health status in population health survey.

Authors:  Oriol Cunillera; Ricard Tresserras; Luis Rajmil; Gemma Vilagut; Pilar Brugulat; Mike Herdman; Anna Mompart; Antonia Medina; Yolanda Pardo; Jordi Alonso; John Brazier; Montse Ferrer
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-03-31       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Race and preference-based health-related quality of life measures in the United States.

Authors:  Claudia C A Pereira; Mari Palta; John Mullahy; Dennis G Fryback
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-12-23       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Agreement about identifying patients who change over time: cautionary results in cataract and heart failure patients.

Authors:  David Feeny; Karen Spritzer; Ron D Hays; Honghu Liu; Theodore G Ganiats; Robert M Kaplan; Mari Palta; Dennis G Fryback
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  Correlates of health-related quality of life in type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  D J Wexler; R W Grant; E Wittenberg; J L Bosch; E Cagliero; L Delahanty; M A Blais; J B Meigs
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2006-04-29       Impact factor: 10.122

7.  Measuring preferences for cost-utility analysis: how choice of method may influence decision-making.

Authors:  Christine M McDonough; Anna N A Tosteson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  A longitudinal comparison of 5 preference-weighted health state classification systems in persons with intervertebral disk herniation.

Authors:  Christine M McDonough; Tor D Tosteson; Anna N A Tosteson; Alan M Jette; Margaret R Grove; James N Weinstein
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2010-11-22       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  US and UK versions of the EQ-5D preference weights: does choice of preference weights make a difference?

Authors:  I-Chan Huang; Richard J Willke; Mark J Atkinson; William R Lenderking; Constantine Frangakis; Albert W Wu
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-04-06       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  The EQ-5D-5L Improves on the EQ-5D-3L for Health-related Quality-of-life Assessment in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Meridith E Greene; Kevin A Rader; Göran Garellick; Henrik Malchau; Andrew A Freiberg; Ola Rolfson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.