Helen Dakin1, Alastair Gray, David Murray. 1. Department of Public Health, Health Economics Research Centre, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, UK. helen.dakin@dph.ox.ac.uk
Abstract
PURPOSE: The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a validated 12-item measure of knee replacement outcomes. An algorithm to estimate EQ-5D utilities from OKS would facilitate cost-utility analysis on studies analyses using OKS but not generic health state preference measures. We estimate mapping (or cross-walking) models that predict EQ-5D utilities and/or responses based on OKS. We also compare different model specifications and assess whether different datasets yield different mapping algorithms. METHODS: Models were estimated using data from the Knee Arthroplasty Trial and the UK Patient Reported Outcome Measures dataset, giving a combined estimation dataset of 134,269 questionnaires from 81,213 knee replacement patients and an internal validation dataset of 45,213 questionnaires from 27,397 patients. The best model was externally validated on registry data (10,002 observations from 4,505 patients) from the South West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre. Eight models of the relationship between OKS and EQ-5D were evaluated, including ordinary least squares, generalized linear models, two-part models, three-part models and response mapping. RESULTS: A multinomial response mapping model using OKS responses to predict EQ-5D response levels had best prediction accuracy, with two-part and three-part models also performing well. In the external validation sample, this model had a mean squared error of 0.033 and a mean absolute error of 0.129. Relative model performance, coefficients and predictions differed slightly but significantly between the two estimation datasets. CONCLUSIONS: The resulting response mapping algorithm can be used to predict EQ-5D utilities and responses from OKS responses. Response mapping appears to perform particularly well in large datasets.
PURPOSE: The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a validated 12-item measure of knee replacement outcomes. An algorithm to estimate EQ-5D utilities from OKS would facilitate cost-utility analysis on studies analyses using OKS but not generic health state preference measures. We estimate mapping (or cross-walking) models that predict EQ-5D utilities and/or responses based on OKS. We also compare different model specifications and assess whether different datasets yield different mapping algorithms. METHODS: Models were estimated using data from the Knee Arthroplasty Trial and the UK Patient Reported Outcome Measures dataset, giving a combined estimation dataset of 134,269 questionnaires from 81,213 knee replacement patients and an internal validation dataset of 45,213 questionnaires from 27,397 patients. The best model was externally validated on registry data (10,002 observations from 4,505 patients) from the South West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre. Eight models of the relationship between OKS and EQ-5D were evaluated, including ordinary least squares, generalized linear models, two-part models, three-part models and response mapping. RESULTS: A multinomial response mapping model using OKS responses to predict EQ-5D response levels had best prediction accuracy, with two-part and three-part models also performing well. In the external validation sample, this model had a mean squared error of 0.033 and a mean absolute error of 0.129. Relative model performance, coefficients and predictions differed slightly but significantly between the two estimation datasets. CONCLUSIONS: The resulting response mapping algorithm can be used to predict EQ-5D utilities and responses from OKS responses. Response mapping appears to perform particularly well in large datasets.
Authors: Pirjo Räsänen; Eija Roine; Harri Sintonen; Virpi Semberg-Konttinen; Olli-Pekka Ryynänen; Risto Roine Journal: Int J Technol Assess Health Care Date: 2006 Impact factor: 2.188
Authors: Oliver Rivero-Arias; Melissa Ouellet; Alastair Gray; Jane Wolstenholme; Peter M Rothwell; Ramon Luengo-Fernandez Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2009-10-26 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Florian D Naal; Franco M Impellizzeri; Ulrich Lenze; Vanessa Wellauer; Rüdiger von Eisenhart-Rothe; Michael Leunig Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-06-12 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Jonathan R B Hutt; Johnathan Craik; Joideep Phadnis; Andrew G Cobb Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2014-08-09 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Ilana N Ackerman; Mark A Tacey; Zanfina Ademi; Megan A Bohensky; Danny Liew; Caroline A Brand Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-03-14 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Stavros Petrou; Oliver Rivero-Arias; Helen Dakin; Louise Longworth; Mark Oppe; Robert Froud; Alastair Gray Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 4.981
Authors: Jiabi Wen; Xuejing Jin; Fatima Al Sayah; Hilary Short; Arto Ohinmaa; Sara N Davison; Michael Walsh; Jeffrey A Johnson Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-07-19 Impact factor: 4.147