OBJECTIVE: Empirical head-to-head comparison of the health utility index (HUI) mark 2 and 3 and the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) in injury patients of all severity levels to obtain more insight into the strengths and limitations of the multi-attribute utility measures (MAUI) to estimate utility losses in injury populations. DESIGN: A self-assessment survey that included the EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 to measure generic health-related quality of life. PATIENTS: Injury patients in The Netherlands 2 years after they attended the emergency department. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Shannon's index and Shannon's evenness index were used to assess absolute and relative informativity, both for the summary scores and by dimension. The study also analysed convergent and construct validity of the MAUI. RESULTS: Mean summary scores significantly differed between the instruments, with highest summary scores for HUI2 (0.88), followed by HUI3 (0.80) and EQ-5D (0.78). Absolute and relative informativity by dimension was highest for the HUI3 descriptive system. The HUI3 was most sensitive for ageing and comorbidity. The largest differences between the MAUI were found for pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression/emotion. The largest differences in discriminative power between EQ-5D and HUI (mark 2 and 3) were seen for skull-brain injury, internal organ injury and upper extremity fractures. CONCLUSIONS: Different MAUI resulted in significantly different summary scores. The instruments and their dimensions performed differently for injury severity levels, ageing, comorbidity and injury groups. A combination of the HUI and EQ-5D should be used in studies on injury-related disability, because the combination covers all relevant health dimensions, is applicable in all kinds of injury populations and in widely different age ranges.
OBJECTIVE: Empirical head-to-head comparison of the health utility index (HUI) mark 2 and 3 and the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) in injury patients of all severity levels to obtain more insight into the strengths and limitations of the multi-attribute utility measures (MAUI) to estimate utility losses in injury populations. DESIGN: A self-assessment survey that included the EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 to measure generic health-related quality of life. PATIENTS: Injury patients in The Netherlands 2 years after they attended the emergency department. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Shannon's index and Shannon's evenness index were used to assess absolute and relative informativity, both for the summary scores and by dimension. The study also analysed convergent and construct validity of the MAUI. RESULTS: Mean summary scores significantly differed between the instruments, with highest summary scores for HUI2 (0.88), followed by HUI3 (0.80) and EQ-5D (0.78). Absolute and relative informativity by dimension was highest for the HUI3 descriptive system. The HUI3 was most sensitive for ageing and comorbidity. The largest differences between the MAUI were found for pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression/emotion. The largest differences in discriminative power between EQ-5D and HUI (mark 2 and 3) were seen for skull-brain injury, internal organ injury and upper extremity fractures. CONCLUSIONS: Different MAUI resulted in significantly different summary scores. The instruments and their dimensions performed differently for injury severity levels, ageing, comorbidity and injury groups. A combination of the HUI and EQ-5D should be used in studies on injury-related disability, because the combination covers all relevant health dimensions, is applicable in all kinds of injury populations and in widely different age ranges.
Authors: Barbara L Conner-Spady; Deborah A Marshall; Eric Bohm; Michael J Dunbar; Lynda Loucks; Ammar Al Khudairy; Tom W Noseworthy Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-01-03 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Juan Zhu; Xin-Xin Yan; Cheng-Cheng Liu; Hong Wang; Le Wang; Su-Mei Cao; Xian-Zhen Liao; Yun-Feng Xi; Yong Ji; Lin Lei; Hai-Fan Xiao; Hai-Jing Guan; Wen-Qiang Wei; Min Dai; Wanqing Chen; Ju-Fang Shi Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2020-09-15 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: M F Janssen; A Simon Pickard; Dominik Golicki; Claire Gudex; Maciej Niewada; Luciana Scalone; Paul Swinburn; Jan Busschbach Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2012-11-25 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Luciana Scalone; Roberta Ciampichini; Stefano Fagiuoli; Ivan Gardini; Francesco Fusco; Laura Gaeta; Anna Del Prete; Giancarlo Cesana; Lorenzo G Mantovani Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2012-11-29 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Steve W Goodacre; Richard W Wilson; Mike Bradburn; Martina Santarelli; Jon P Nicholl Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2012-02-03 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Suzanne Polinder; Juanita A Haagsma; Eefje Belt; Ronan A Lyons; Vicki Erasmus; Johan Lund; Ed F van Beeck Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-12-23 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Ronan A Lyons; Denise Kendrick; Elizabeth M Towner; Nicola Christie; Steven Macey; Carol Coupland; Belinda J Gabbe Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2011-12-06 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Belinda J Gabbe; James E Harrison; Ronan A Lyons; Elton R Edwards; Peter A Cameron Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2013-01-26 Impact factor: 2.655