Literature DB >> 28593532

Establishing benchmark EQ-5D-3L population health state utilities and identifying their correlates in Gansu Province, China.

Lei Si1,2, Lei Shi3, Mingsheng Chen4, Andrew J Palmer1.   

Abstract

PURPOSES: Despite a flurry of cost utility analyses conducted in the Chinese population in recent years, a standard set of health state utilities (HSUs) for the Chinese population is lacking. The aims of this study were to (1) determine benchmark age- and sex-specific HSUs for a Chinese population, and (2) assess key correlates of HSUs in this population.
METHODS: Quality-of-life was evaluated using the validated EQ-5D-3L questionnaire. HSUs were calculated using data collected from Gansu Province (n = 9833). Overall differences in HSUs were analysed using linear regression and a two-tailed p value <0.05 was determined to be statistically significant. The minimal difference in weighted index was set at 0.074.
RESULTS: HSUs decreased with age in both males and females. Living in the non-capital areas, being separated/divorced/widowed or never married, being never educated, diagnosed with chronic disease, and no regular physical activity were associated with lower HSUs. HSUs for women were lower than for men in univariate regression analysis; however, no differences were found after adjusting for other covariates. In addition, the difference in HSU reached the level of minimal difference in weighted index for participants with chronic disease. HSUs for those who were diagnosed with chronic disease were 0.098 (0.092-0.104) lower than those without chronic disease.
CONCLUSIONS: This study reports HSUs for a Chinese population in Gansu and investigates the key correlates of HSUs in this population. In addition, the use of EQ-5D-3L in assessing population health is limited given the high ceiling effect and skewed HSUs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chinese; EQ-5D; Health state utility; Quality of life

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28593532     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-017-1614-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  35 in total

Review 1.  Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities.

Authors:  Sarah J Whitehead; Shehzad Ali
Journal:  Br Med Bull       Date:  2010-10-29       Impact factor: 4.291

2.  Racial and ethnic differences in preference-based health status measure.

Authors:  Alex Z Fu; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.580

3.  Validation of the EQ-5D in a general population sample in urban China.

Authors:  Hong-Mei Wang; Donald L Patrick; Todd C Edwards; Anne M Skalicky; Hai-Yan Zeng; Wen-Wen Gu
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-04-20       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 4.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of utility-based quality of life for osteoporosis-related conditions.

Authors:  L Si; T M Winzenberg; B de Graaff; A J Palmer
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2014-02-22       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)--explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force.

Authors:  Don Husereau; Michael Drummond; Stavros Petrou; Chris Carswell; David Moher; Dan Greenberg; Federico Augustovski; Andrew H Briggs; Josephine Mauskopf; Elizabeth Loder
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.725

6.  A comparison of EQ-5D-3L population norms in Queensland, Australia, estimated using utility value sets from Australia, the UK and USA.

Authors:  Susan Clemens; Nelufa Begum; Catherine Harper; Jennifer A Whitty; Paul A Scuffham
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Population health status in China: EQ-5D results, by age, sex and socio-economic status, from the National Health Services Survey 2008.

Authors:  Sun Sun; Jiaying Chen; Magnus Johannesson; Paul Kind; Ling Xu; Yaoguang Zhang; Kristina Burström
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Cost-utility analysis of a preventive home visit program for older adults in Germany.

Authors:  Christian Brettschneider; Tobias Luck; Steffen Fleischer; Gudrun Roling; Katrin Beutner; Melanie Luppa; Johann Behrens; Steffi G Riedel-Heller; Hans-Helmut König
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-04-03       Impact factor: 2.655

9.  Swedish experience-based value sets for EQ-5D health states.

Authors:  Kristina Burström; Sun Sun; Ulf-G Gerdtham; Martin Henriksson; Magnus Johannesson; Lars-Åke Levin; Niklas Zethraeus
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-08-22       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  Is marital status associated with quality of life?

Authors:  Kyu-Tae Han; Eun-Cheol Park; Jae-Hyun Kim; Sun Jung Kim; Sohee Park
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2014-08-08       Impact factor: 3.186

View more
  5 in total

1.  Socioeconomic status and self-rated health in Iran: findings from a general population study.

Authors:  Soraya Nouraei Motlagh; Zahra Asadi Piri; Heshmatollah Asadi; Razyeh Bajoulvand; Satar Rezaei
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2022-06-29

2.  Poverty and health-related quality of life: a cross-sectional study in rural China.

Authors:  Zhong Li; Liang Zhang
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 3.186

3.  Cost-effectiveness of the Da Qing diabetes prevention program: A modelling study.

Authors:  Wanxia Hu; Wenhua Xu; Lei Si; Cuilian Wang; Qicheng Jiang; Lidan Wang; Henry Cutler
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-12-31       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Estimation of the cost-effective threshold of a quality-adjusted life year in China based on the value of statistical life.

Authors:  Dan Cai; Si Shi; Shan Jiang; Lei Si; Jing Wu; Yawen Jiang
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2021-10-16

5.  Quality of life during the epidemic of COVID-19 and its associated factors among enterprise workers in East China.

Authors:  Xiaoxiao Chen; Qian Xu; Haijiang Lin; Jianfu Zhu; Yue Chen; Qi Zhao; Chaowei Fu; Na Wang
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2021-07-10       Impact factor: 3.295

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.