Guizhi Weng1, Yanming Hong1, Nan Luo2, Clara Mukuria3, Jie Jiang1,4, Zhihao Yang5,6, Sha Li7. 1. College of Pharmacy, Jinan University, 601 West Huangpu avenue, 510632, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China. 2. Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. 3. School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. 4. Dongguan Institute of Jinan University, Dongguan, People's Republic of China. 5. College of Pharmacy, Jinan University, 601 West Huangpu avenue, 510632, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China. Zhihao_yang_cn@126.com. 6. Health Services Management Department, Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang, People's Republic of China. Zhihao_yang_cn@126.com. 7. College of Pharmacy, Jinan University, 601 West Huangpu avenue, 510632, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China. tlisha@jnu.edu.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: EQ-5D-3L has been used in the National Health Services Survey of China since 2008 to monitor population health. The five-level version of EQ-5D was developed, but there lacks evidence to support the use of five-level version of EQ-5D in China. This study was conducted to compare the measurement properties of both the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in quantifying health-related quality of life (HRQoL) burden for 4 different health conditions in China. METHODS: Participants from China were recruited to complete the 3L and 5L questionnaire via Internet. Quota was set to recruit five groups of individuals, with one group of individuals without any health condition and one group of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), HIV/AIDS, chronic Hepatitis B (CHB), or depression, respectively. The 3L and 5L were compared in terms of response distributions, percentages of reporting 'no problems', index value distributions, known-group validity and their relative efficiency. RESULTS: In total, 500 individuals completed the online survey, including 140 healthy individuals, 122 individuals with hepatitis B, 107 with depression, 90 individuals with GAD and 101 with HIV/AIDS. 5L also had smoother and less clustered index value distributions. Healthy group showed different response distributions to the four condition groups. The percentage of reporting 'no problems' decreased significantly in the 5L in all domains (P < 0.01), especially in the pain/discomfort dimension (relative difference: 43.10%). Relative efficiency suggested that 5L had a higher absolute discriminatory power than the 3L version between healthy participant and the other 4 condition groups, especially for the HIV/AIDS group when the 3L results was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The 5L version may be preferable to the 3L, as it demonstrated superior performance with respect to higher sensitivity to mild health problems, better relative efficiency and responses and index value distributions.
BACKGROUND: EQ-5D-3L has been used in the National Health Services Survey of China since 2008 to monitor population health. The five-level version of EQ-5D was developed, but there lacks evidence to support the use of five-level version of EQ-5D in China. This study was conducted to compare the measurement properties of both the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in quantifying health-related quality of life (HRQoL) burden for 4 different health conditions in China. METHODS: Participants from China were recruited to complete the 3L and 5L questionnaire via Internet. Quota was set to recruit five groups of individuals, with one group of individuals without any health condition and one group of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), HIV/AIDS, chronic Hepatitis B (CHB), or depression, respectively. The 3L and 5L were compared in terms of response distributions, percentages of reporting 'no problems', index value distributions, known-group validity and their relative efficiency. RESULTS: In total, 500 individuals completed the online survey, including 140 healthy individuals, 122 individuals with hepatitis B, 107 with depression, 90 individuals with GAD and 101 with HIV/AIDS. 5L also had smoother and less clustered index value distributions. Healthy group showed different response distributions to the four condition groups. The percentage of reporting 'no problems' decreased significantly in the 5L in all domains (P < 0.01), especially in the pain/discomfort dimension (relative difference: 43.10%). Relative efficiency suggested that 5L had a higher absolute discriminatory power than the 3L version between healthy participant and the other 4 condition groups, especially for the HIV/AIDS group when the 3L results was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The 5L version may be preferable to the 3L, as it demonstrated superior performance with respect to higher sensitivity to mild health problems, better relative efficiency and responses and index value distributions.
Authors: Juan Zhu; Xin-Xin Yan; Cheng-Cheng Liu; Hong Wang; Le Wang; Su-Mei Cao; Xian-Zhen Liao; Yun-Feng Xi; Yong Ji; Lin Lei; Hai-Fan Xiao; Hai-Jing Guan; Wen-Qiang Wei; Min Dai; Wanqing Chen; Ju-Fang Shi Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2020-09-15 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Y X Jia; F Q Cui; L Li; D L Zhang; G M Zhang; F Z Wang; X H Gong; H Zheng; Z H Wu; N Miao; X J Sun; L Zhang; J J Lv; F Yang Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-03-14 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: M F Janssen; A Simon Pickard; Dominik Golicki; Claire Gudex; Maciej Niewada; Luciana Scalone; Paul Swinburn; Jan Busschbach Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2012-11-25 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Prudence Wing Hang Cheung; Carlos King Ho Wong; Jason Pui Yin Cheung; Dino Samartzis; Keith Dip Kei Luk; Cindy Lo Kuen Lam; Kenneth Man Chee Cheung Journal: Scoliosis Spinal Disord Date: 2016-08-04
Authors: Helen Hoi Lun Tsang; Jason Pui Yin Cheung; Carlos King Ho Wong; Prudence Wing Hang Cheung; Chak Sing Lau; Ho Yin Chung Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2019-01-30 Impact factor: 5.156