Ingrid A Cox1,2, Julie Campbell1, Barbara de Graaff1,2, Petr Otahal1, Tamera J Corte2,3,4, Yuben Moodley2,5,6,7, Peter Hopkins2,8,9, Sacha Macansh10, E Haydn Walters1,2, Andrew J Palmer11,12. 1. Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, 17 Liverpool Street, Hobart, TAS, Australia. 2. NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence for Pulmonary Fibrosis, Melbourne, Australia. 3. Central Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia. 4. Department of Respiratory and Sleep Medicine, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, Australia. 5. Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. 6. Institute of Respiratory Health, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. 7. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Fiona Stanley Hospital, Murdoch, Australia. 8. Queensland Centre for Pulmonary Transplantation and Vascular Disease, The Prince Charles Hospital, Chermside, Australia. 9. Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. 10. Australian Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Registry, Lung Foundation of Australia, New South Wales, Australia. 11. Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, 17 Liverpool Street, Hobart, TAS, Australia. andrew.palmer@utas.edu.au. 12. NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence for Pulmonary Fibrosis, Melbourne, Australia. andrew.palmer@utas.edu.au.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive and debilitating chronic lung disease with a high symptom burden, which has a substantial impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Our study aimed to assess the suitability of the EuroQol five-dimension (EQ-5D-5L) and the Assessment of Quality of Life- eight-dimension (AQoL-8D) questionnaires in measuring HRQoL as health state utility values (HSUVs) in an Australian IPF cohort. METHODS: Data for estimation of health state utility values (HSUVs) were collected from participants of the Australian IPF Registry (AIPFR) using self-administered surveys which included the EQ-5D-5L and the AQoL-8D. Data on lung function and disease specific HRQoL instruments were collected from the AIPFR. Performance of the two instruments was evaluated based on questionnaire practicality, agreement between the two instruments and test performance (internal and construct validity). RESULTS: Overall completion rates for the EQ-5D-5L and AQoL-8D were 96% and 85%, respectively. Mean (median) HSUVs were 0.65 (0.70) and 0.69 (0.72) for the EQ-5D-5L and AQoL-8D, respectively. There was reasonable agreement between the two instruments based on the Bland-Altman plot mean difference (-0.04) and intraclass correlation coefficient (0.84), however there were some fundamental differences. A larger range of values was observed with the EQ-5D-5L (-0.57-1.00 vs 0.16-1.00). The EQ-5D-5L had a greater divergent sensitivity and efficacy in relation to assessing HSUVs between clinical groupings. The AQoL-8D ,however, had a higher sensitivity to measure psychosocial aspects of HRQoL in IPF. CONCLUSION: The EQ-5D-5L demonstrated superior performance when compared to AQoL-8D in persons with IPF. This may be attributable to the high symptom burden which is physically debilitating to which the EQ-5D-5L may be more sensitive.
PURPOSE: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive and debilitating chronic lung disease with a high symptom burden, which has a substantial impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Our study aimed to assess the suitability of the EuroQol five-dimension (EQ-5D-5L) and the Assessment of Quality of Life- eight-dimension (AQoL-8D) questionnaires in measuring HRQoL as health state utility values (HSUVs) in an Australian IPF cohort. METHODS: Data for estimation of health state utility values (HSUVs) were collected from participants of the Australian IPF Registry (AIPFR) using self-administered surveys which included the EQ-5D-5L and the AQoL-8D. Data on lung function and disease specific HRQoL instruments were collected from the AIPFR. Performance of the two instruments was evaluated based on questionnaire practicality, agreement between the two instruments and test performance (internal and construct validity). RESULTS: Overall completion rates for the EQ-5D-5L and AQoL-8D were 96% and 85%, respectively. Mean (median) HSUVs were 0.65 (0.70) and 0.69 (0.72) for the EQ-5D-5L and AQoL-8D, respectively. There was reasonable agreement between the two instruments based on the Bland-Altman plot mean difference (-0.04) and intraclass correlation coefficient (0.84), however there were some fundamental differences. A larger range of values was observed with the EQ-5D-5L (-0.57-1.00 vs 0.16-1.00). The EQ-5D-5L had a greater divergent sensitivity and efficacy in relation to assessing HSUVs between clinical groupings. The AQoL-8D ,however, had a higher sensitivity to measure psychosocial aspects of HRQoL in IPF. CONCLUSION: The EQ-5D-5L demonstrated superior performance when compared to AQoL-8D in persons with IPF. This may be attributable to the high symptom burden which is physically debilitating to which the EQ-5D-5L may be more sensitive.
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: Yuben Moodley; Nicole Goh; Ian Glaspole; Sacha Macansh; E Haydn Walters; Sally Chapman; Peter Hopkins; Paul N Reynolds; Christopher Zappala; Wendy Cooper; Annabelle Mahar; Samantha Ellis; Samuel McCormack; William Darbishire; Richard Wood-Baker; Tamera J Corte Journal: Respirology Date: 2014-08-14 Impact factor: 6.424
Authors: E Haydn Walters; Andrew J Palmer; Ingrid A Cox; Barbara de Graaff; Hasnat Ahmed; Julie Campbell; Petr Otahal; Tamera J Corte; Ian Glaspole; Yuben Moodley; Nicole Goh; Sacha Macansh Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-05-17 Impact factor: 4.147
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