Literature DB >> 33692898

Population norms for the EQ-5D-3L in China derived from the 2013 National Health Services Survey.

Qiang Yao1,2, Chaojie Liu2, Yaoguang Zhang3, Ling Xu4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: EQ-5D-3L is one of the most commonly used instruments for assessing health-related quality of life and cost-utility analyses, but it is not yet available in China. This study aims to develop population norms for the EQ-5D-3L in China in order to encourage appropriate use and interpretation of the EQ-5D-3L instrument.
METHODS: Data were extracted from the 2013 National Health Services Survey on a nationally representative sample of 188 720 participants. The utility index based on the 2018 Chinese preference-based value sets were calculated for the participants with different demographic and socio-economic characteristics. Differences in reported problems and visual analogue scale (VAS) and utility index scores were tested using a logistic, linear and tobit regression model, respectively.
RESULTS: The Chinese respondents were less likely to report problems on the EQ-5D dimensions compared with most populations in other countries. Pain/discomfort was the most commonly reported problem (12.6%). This resulted in a high ceiling effect (84.19%) on the utility index and high mean scores for the utility index (0.985 ± 0.056) and VAS (80.91 ± 13.74) in the Chinese population. Those who were younger, better educated, employed, married, had no illness condition, lived in a more developed region and had a higher income obtained higher scores in both VAS and utility index. The VAS and utility index scores were also associated with gender, residency and lifestyles, but not always in a consistent way. Male and rural residents had a higher VAS score but not in the utility index compared with their female and urban counterparts.
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides national population norms for the EQ-5D-3L based on the 2018 Chinese preference-based value sets. The norms can be used as a reference for health evaluation studies. Cautions need to be taken for presenting and interpreting the utility index results given the high ceiling effect of the EQ-5D-3L instrument.
Copyright © 2021 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33692898      PMCID: PMC7916444          DOI: 10.7189/jogh.11.08001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Glob Health        ISSN: 2047-2978            Impact factor:   4.413


  55 in total

1.  Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 health surveys in a general population survey in Alberta, Canada.

Authors:  J A Johnson; A S Pickard
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Comparison of population health status in six european countries: results of a representative survey using the EQ-5D questionnaire.

Authors:  Hans-Helmut König; Sebastian Bernert; Matthias C Angermeyer; Herbert Matschinger; Montse Martinez; Gemma Vilagut; Josep Maria Haro; Giovanni de Girolamo; Ron de Graaf; Viviane Kovess; Jordi Alonso
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey.

Authors:  P Kind; P Dolan; C Gudex; A Williams
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-03-07

4.  Time Trade-Off Value Set for EQ-5D-3L Based on a Nationally Representative Chinese Population Survey.

Authors:  Lang Zhuo; Ling Xu; Jingtao Ye; Sun Sun; Yaoguang Zhang; Kristina Burstrom; Jiaying Chen
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2018-05-18       Impact factor: 5.725

5.  Health, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Quality of Life: What is the Difference?

Authors:  Milad Karimi; John Brazier
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  General population reference values for the French version of the EuroQol EQ-5D health utility instrument.

Authors:  Thomas V Perneger; Christophe Combescure; Delphine S Courvoisier
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2010-04-15       Impact factor: 5.725

7.  EQ-5D-3L derived population norms for health related quality of life in Sri Lanka.

Authors:  Sanjeewa Kularatna; Jennifer A Whitty; Newell W Johnson; Ruwan Jayasinghe; Paul A Scuffham
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-11-03       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Influence of culture, residential segregation and socioeconomic development on rural elderly health-related quality of life in Guangxi, China.

Authors:  Tai Zhang; Wuxiang Shi; Zhaoquan Huang; Dong Gao; Zhenyou Guo; Jianying Liu; Virasakdi Chongsuvivatwong
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 3.186

9.  Health-related quality of life measured using the EQ-5D-5L: South Australian population norms.

Authors:  Nikki McCaffrey; Billingsley Kaambwa; David C Currow; Julie Ratcliffe
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2016-09-20       Impact factor: 3.186

10.  Health-related quality of life as measured with EQ-5D among populations with and without specific chronic conditions: a population-based survey in Shaanxi Province, China.

Authors:  Zhijun Tan; Ying Liang; Siming Liu; Wenjun Cao; Haibo Tu; Lingxia Guo; Yongyong Xu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-02       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

1.  Health-Related Quality of Life and Utility Scores of Lung Cancer Patients Treated with Traditional Chinese Medicine in China.

Authors:  Liu Liu; Yan Wei; Yue Teng; Juntao Yan; Fuming Li; Yingyao Chen
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2022-02-04       Impact factor: 2.711

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.