OBJECTIVE: To compare.the results of EQ-SD and SF-12 for assessing health-related quality of life in stroke patients. METHODS: EQ-5D and SF-12 were administered to 598 ischemic stroke patients through face-to-face interviews. Differences in PCS-12 and MCS-12 scores across different levels of EQ-5D dimensions were tested using analysis of variance (ANOVA). The EQ-5D index and visual analogue scale/score (VAS) scores of respondents were compared between those with higher than and lower than median SF-12 scores using student t-test. Pearson correlations between PCS-12 and EQ-5D scores were tested. RESULTS: PCS-12 and MCA-12 scores varied across different levels of EQ-5D dimensional scores, except for pain/discomfort. EQ-5D and VAS scores varied between those with high and low SF-12 scores. No significant differences in EQ-5D index and VAS scores were found in the EQ-5D indicated healthy respondents between those with high and low SF-12 scores (P>0.05). PCS-12 was positively correlated with EQ-5D index and VAS scores, with r=0.15 (P<0.001) and r=0.33 (P< 0.001), respectively. MCS-12 was also positively correlated with EQ-5D index and VAS score, with r=0.17 (P<0.001) and r = 0.13 (P<0.001), respectively. CONCLUSION: Both instruments are valid measurements for assessing quality of life. The SF-12 appeared to be more sensitive to differences in health status. EQ-5D is preferable if both quality of life assessment and health economics study are to be conducted.
OBJECTIVE: To compare.the results of EQ-SD and SF-12 for assessing health-related quality of life in strokepatients. METHODS:EQ-5D and SF-12 were administered to 598 ischemic strokepatients through face-to-face interviews. Differences in PCS-12 and MCS-12 scores across different levels of EQ-5D dimensions were tested using analysis of variance (ANOVA). The EQ-5D index and visual analogue scale/score (VAS) scores of respondents were compared between those with higher than and lower than median SF-12 scores using student t-test. Pearson correlations between PCS-12 and EQ-5D scores were tested. RESULTS:PCS-12 and MCA-12 scores varied across different levels of EQ-5D dimensional scores, except for pain/discomfort. EQ-5D and VAS scores varied between those with high and low SF-12 scores. No significant differences in EQ-5D index and VAS scores were found in the EQ-5D indicated healthy respondents between those with high and low SF-12 scores (P>0.05). PCS-12 was positively correlated with EQ-5D index and VAS scores, with r=0.15 (P<0.001) and r=0.33 (P< 0.001), respectively. MCS-12 was also positively correlated with EQ-5D index and VAS score, with r=0.17 (P<0.001) and r = 0.13 (P<0.001), respectively. CONCLUSION: Both instruments are valid measurements for assessing quality of life. The SF-12 appeared to be more sensitive to differences in health status. EQ-5D is preferable if both quality of life assessment and health economics study are to be conducted.
Authors: Raed A Joundi; Joel Adekanye; Alexander A Leung; Paul Ronksley; Eric E Smith; Alexander D Rebchuk; Thalia S Field; Michael D Hill; Stephen B Wilton; Lauren C Bresee Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2022-06-22 Impact factor: 6.106