EQ-5D versus SF-6D in an older, chronically ill patient group
Gerard, Karen, Nicholson, Tricia, Mullee, Mark, Mehta, Raj and Roderick, Paul (2004) EQ-5D versus SF-6D in an older, chronically ill patient group. Applied Economics and Health Policy, 3, (2), 91-102(12).
Full text not available from this repository.
Choosing between preference-based instruments of health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) in particular situations is an important area for research. Even where instruments can be assumed to be measuring the same thing, they may not be interchangeable. The study presented investigates the extent to which EQ-5D and SF-6D instruments are interchangeable in an older, chronically ill patient group undergoing haemodialysis. Head-to-head comparisons were made using ‘practicality’, ‘descriptive validity’, ‘empirical validity’, mean utilities and associated distributions. Overall it was difficult to choose between instruments on the basis of descriptive or empirical validity, since both performed similarly. Important differences were, however, found relating to practicality: a significantly higher response rate in favour of EQ-5D; and lower levels of missing data to derive health states. Non-response was significantly associated with age and co-morbidity of respondents. We suggest that in patients undergoing haemodialysis, and potentially other older chronically ill patient groups, EQ-5D is the primary preference-based generic HR-QOL instrument.
|Keywords:||haemodialysis, quality of life rating scales, economic implications, EQ-5D, SF-6D, chronically ill, patient group, comparisons|
|Subjects:||R Medicine > RT Nursing
R Medicine > R Medicine (General)
|Divisions:||University Structure - Pre August 2011 > Superseded (SONM) > Superseded (HSR)
University Structure - Pre August 2011 > School of Medicine > Community Clinical Sciences
|Date Deposited:||31 Mar 2006|
|Last Modified:||02 Mar 2012 12:04|
|Contact Email Address:||email@example.com|
|RDF:||RDF+N-Triples, RDF+N3, RDF+XML, Browse.|
Actions (login required)