Sophie Gottschalk1, Hans-Helmut König2, Mona Nejad2, Judith Dams2. 1. Department of Health Economics and Health Services Research, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. s.gottschalk@uke.de. 2. Department of Health Economics and Health Services Research, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Healthcare interventions for middle-old and oldest-old individuals are often (economically) evaluated using the EQ-5D to measure health-related quality of life (HrQoL). This requires sufficient measurement properties of the EQ-5D. Therefore, the current study aimed to systematically review studies assessing the measurement properties of the EQ-5D in this population. METHODS: The databases PubMed, Cochrane library, Web of Science, Embase, and EconLit were searched for studies providing empirical evidence of reliability, validity, and/or responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in samples with a mean age ≥ 75 years. Studies were selected by two independent reviewers, and the methodological quality was assessed using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. Results were rated against updated criteria for good measurement properties (sufficient, insufficient, inconsistent, indeterminate). The evidence was summarized, and the quality of evidence was graded using a modified GRADE approach. RESULTS: For both EQ-5D versions, high-quality evidence for sufficient convergent validity was found. Known-groups validity was sufficient for the EQ-5D-5L (high-quality evidence), whereas the results were inconsistent for the EQ-5D-3L. Results regarding the reliability were inconsistent (EQ-5D-3L) or entirely lacking (EQ-5D-5L). Responsiveness based on correlations of change scores with instruments measuring related/similar constructs was insufficient for the EQ-5D-3L (high-quality evidence). For the EQ-5D-5L, the available evidence on responsiveness to change in (Hr)QoL instruments was limited. CONCLUSION: Since the responsiveness of the EQ-5D in a population of middle-old and oldest-old individuals was questionable, either using additional instruments or considering the use of an alternative, more comprehensive instrument of (Hr)QoL might be advisable, especially for economic evaluations.
PURPOSE: Healthcare interventions for middle-old and oldest-old individuals are often (economically) evaluated using the EQ-5D to measure health-related quality of life (HrQoL). This requires sufficient measurement properties of the EQ-5D. Therefore, the current study aimed to systematically review studies assessing the measurement properties of the EQ-5D in this population. METHODS: The databases PubMed, Cochrane library, Web of Science, Embase, and EconLit were searched for studies providing empirical evidence of reliability, validity, and/or responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in samples with a mean age ≥ 75 years. Studies were selected by two independent reviewers, and the methodological quality was assessed using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. Results were rated against updated criteria for good measurement properties (sufficient, insufficient, inconsistent, indeterminate). The evidence was summarized, and the quality of evidence was graded using a modified GRADE approach. RESULTS: For both EQ-5D versions, high-quality evidence for sufficient convergent validity was found. Known-groups validity was sufficient for the EQ-5D-5L (high-quality evidence), whereas the results were inconsistent for the EQ-5D-3L. Results regarding the reliability were inconsistent (EQ-5D-3L) or entirely lacking (EQ-5D-5L). Responsiveness based on correlations of change scores with instruments measuring related/similar constructs was insufficient for the EQ-5D-3L (high-quality evidence). For the EQ-5D-5L, the available evidence on responsiveness to change in (Hr)QoL instruments was limited. CONCLUSION: Since the responsiveness of the EQ-5D in a population of middle-old and oldest-old individuals was questionable, either using additional instruments or considering the use of an alternative, more comprehensive instrument of (Hr)QoL might be advisable, especially for economic evaluations.
Authors: Matthew Kennedy-Martin; Bernhard Slaap; Michael Herdman; Mandy van Reenen; Tessa Kennedy-Martin; Wolfgang Greiner; Jan Busschbach; Kristina S Boye Journal: Eur J Health Econ Date: 2020-06-08