Literature DB >> 35688994

EQ-5D-5L: a value set for Romania.

Elena Olariu1, Wael Mohammed2, Yemi Oluboyede2, Raluca Caplescu3, Ileana Gabriela Niculescu-Aron3, Marian Sorin Paveliu4, Luke Vale2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop an EQ-5D-5L value set for Romania.
METHODS: In line with the EuroQoL standardized valuation protocol, computer-assisted interviews were conducted face-to-face in a representative sample in Romania (November 2018-November 2019). Valuation methods included composite time trade-off and discrete choice experiment tasks. Several models were tested, including models that accounted for data censoring, panel structure of the data, heteroscedasticity, conditional logit, and hybrid models. The final model was selected based on logical consistency, theoretical considerations, and use of all available data. We compared our value set with other value sets from Central and Eastern Europe region.
RESULTS: Data from 1493 respondents was used to estimate the value set. A censored hybrid model corrected for heteroscedasticity was selected to represent the value set. The highest decrements in utility were observed for the pain/discomfort dimension (0.375), followed by the mobility dimension (0.293). Health utilities ranged from 1.000 to - 0.323 and 1.3% of the values were negative. The model was corrected with survey weights to better reflect the representativeness of the sample, but the first two coefficients of the self-care dimension stopped being logically consistent. Differences were found between the Romanian, Hungarian and Polish EQ-5D-5L value sets. Good agreement was noted with the Romanian EQ-5D-3L value set, with a swap between pain/discomfort and mobility in ranking of dimensions.
CONCLUSION: A value set for EQ-5D-5L is now available for Romania. This will push one-step further the development of health technology assessment and encourage more health-related quality-of-life research to be conducted locally.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  EQ-5D-5L; Health technology assessment; Utility; Value set

Year:  2022        PMID: 35688994     DOI: 10.1007/s10198-022-01481-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Health Econ        ISSN: 1618-7598


  38 in total

Review 1.  EuroQol: the current state of play.

Authors:  R Brooks
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 2.980

2.  Applying rapid 'de-facto' HTA in resource-limited settings: experience from Romania.

Authors:  Ruth Lopert; Francis Ruiz; Kalipso Chalkidou
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2013-08-14       Impact factor: 2.980

3.  Utilities of the EQ-5D: transferable or not?

Authors:  Saskia Knies; Silvia M A A Evers; Math J J M Candel; Johan L Severens; André J H A Ament
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  Comparing EQ-5D valuation studies: a systematic review and methodological reporting checklist.

Authors:  Feng Xie; Kathryn Gaebel; Kuhan Perampaladas; Brett Doble; Eleanor Pullenayegum
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2013-03-22       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 5.  EQ-5D in Central and Eastern Europe: 2000-2015.

Authors:  Fanni Rencz; László Gulácsi; Michael Drummond; Dominik Golicki; Valentina Prevolnik Rupel; Judit Simon; Elly A Stolk; Valentin Brodszky; Petra Baji; Jakub Závada; Guenka Petrova; Alexandru Rotar; Márta Péntek
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2016-07-29       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Health related quality of life aspects not captured by EQ-5D-5L: Results from an international survey of patients.

Authors:  Olina Efthymiadou; Jean Mossman; Panos Kanavos
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2018-12-14       Impact factor: 2.980

7.  Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L).

Authors:  M Herdman; C Gudex; A Lloyd; Mf Janssen; P Kind; D Parkin; G Bonsel; X Badia
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-04-09       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  A Systematic Review of Studies Comparing the Measurement Properties of the Three-Level and Five-Level Versions of the EQ-5D.

Authors:  Ines Buchholz; Mathieu F Janssen; Thomas Kohlmann; You-Shan Feng
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Cultural Values: Can They Explain Differences in Health Utilities between Countries?

Authors:  Bram Roudijk; A Rogier T Donders; Peep F M Stalmeier
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 2.583

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.