Mihir Gandhi1,2,3, Marcus Ang4,5, Kelvin Teo6, Chee Wai Wong6, Yvonne Chung-Hsi Wei6, Rachel Lee-Yin Tan7, Mathieu F Janssen8, Nan Luo7. 1. Department of Biostatistics, Singapore Clinical Research Institute, Singapore, Singapore. 2. Centre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore. 3. Tampere Center for Child Health Research, University of Tampere and Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland. 4. Corneal and External Eye Disease Department, Singapore National Eye Centre, 11 Third Hospital Avenue, Singapore, Singapore. Marcus.Ang@Singhealth.com.sg. 5. Opthamology and Visual Sciences, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore. Marcus.Ang@Singhealth.com.sg. 6. Corneal and External Eye Disease Department, Singapore National Eye Centre, 11 Third Hospital Avenue, Singapore, Singapore. 7. Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. 8. Section Medical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Department of Psychiatry, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is not clear whether 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) utilities based on recently developed value sets are more responsive than 3-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L) utilities. OBJECTIVES: The study aims were to compare (1) the responsiveness of EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L utilities and (2) the responsiveness of these utilities with the Short Form-6 Dimension (SF-6D) and Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) utilities to the treatment benefit of cataract surgery. METHODS: A total of 148 patients were interviewed before and after their cataract surgery using EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, SF-6D, and HUI3. Responsiveness was assessed for all measures using the mean change (post-treatment-pre-treatment), standardized effect size (SES), standardized response mean (SRM), and F-statistic. RESULTS: Using the Singapore value sets, mean change for EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L utilities was 0.016 and 0.028, SES was 0.097 and 0.199; SRM was 0.091 and 0.196; and F-statistic was 1.2 and 5.7, respectively. Similar trends were observed using the UK/England EQ-5D value sets, although the magnitude was slightly smaller. The mean change, SES, SRM and F-statistics for SF-6D (UK value set) were 0.020, 0.234, 0.249, and 9.2, respectively. The values of mean change, SES, SRM and F-statistics for HUI3 (Canada value set) were 0.080, 0.472, 0.474, and 33.3, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The EQ-5D-5L utilities tend to be more responsive than the EQ-5D-3L utilities to treatment benefits of cataract surgery. The HUI3 utilities are more responsive than both the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D, and SF-6D utilities may be slightly more responsive than the EQ-5D-5L for assessing patients undergoing cataract surgery.
BACKGROUND: It is not clear whether 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) utilities based on recently developed value sets are more responsive than 3-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L) utilities. OBJECTIVES: The study aims were to compare (1) the responsiveness of EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L utilities and (2) the responsiveness of these utilities with the Short Form-6 Dimension (SF-6D) and Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) utilities to the treatment benefit of cataract surgery. METHODS: A total of 148 patients were interviewed before and after their cataract surgery using EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, SF-6D, and HUI3. Responsiveness was assessed for all measures using the mean change (post-treatment-pre-treatment), standardized effect size (SES), standardized response mean (SRM), and F-statistic. RESULTS: Using the Singapore value sets, mean change for EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L utilities was 0.016 and 0.028, SES was 0.097 and 0.199; SRM was 0.091 and 0.196; and F-statistic was 1.2 and 5.7, respectively. Similar trends were observed using the UK/England EQ-5D value sets, although the magnitude was slightly smaller. The mean change, SES, SRM and F-statistics for SF-6D (UK value set) were 0.020, 0.234, 0.249, and 9.2, respectively. The values of mean change, SES, SRM and F-statistics for HUI3 (Canada value set) were 0.080, 0.472, 0.474, and 33.3, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The EQ-5D-5L utilities tend to be more responsive than the EQ-5D-3L utilities to treatment benefits of cataract surgery. The HUI3 utilities are more responsive than both the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D, and SF-6D utilities may be slightly more responsive than the EQ-5D-5L for assessing patients undergoing cataract surgery.
Authors: Ben van Hout; M F Janssen; You-Shan Feng; Thomas Kohlmann; Jan Busschbach; Dominik Golicki; Andrew Lloyd; Luciana Scalone; Paul Kind; A Simon Pickard Journal: Value Health Date: 2012-05-24 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: E P Steinberg; J M Tielsch; O D Schein; J C Javitt; P Sharkey; S D Cassard; M W Legro; M Diener-West; E B Bass; A M Damiano Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 1994-05
Authors: Dominik Golicki; Maciej Niewada; Anna Karlińska; Julia Buczek; Adam Kobayashi; M F Janssen; A Simon Pickard Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-11-26 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: A M Garratt; H Furunes; C Hellum; T Solberg; J I Brox; K Storheim; L G Johnsen Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2021-05-28 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Katie Breheny; William Hollingworth; Rebecca Kandiyali; Padraig Dixon; Abi Loose; Pippa Craggs; Mariusz Grzeda; John Sparrow Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2020-02-20 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Arjun Bhadhuri; Paul Kind; Paola Salari; Katharina Tabea Jungo; Benoît Boland; Stephen Byrne; Stefanie Hossmann; Olivia Dalleur; Wilma Knol; Elisavet Moutzouri; Denis O'Mahony; Kevin D Murphy; Linda Wisselink; Nicolas Rodondi; Matthias Schwenkglenks Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2020-09-29 Impact factor: 3.186