A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups

A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups
复制标题

DOI:
10.1002/hec.866
复制
发表时间:
2004-09-01
期刊:
影响因子:
2.1
通讯作者:
Busschbach, J
Busschbach, J
中科院分区:
医学3区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Brazier, J;Roberts, J;Busschbach, J

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

随着基于偏好的工具数量的增加,比较不同的基于偏好的健康衡量标准变得越来越重要,以便为关于选择工具的重要辩论提供信息。本文对EQ-5D和SF-6D(最近从SF-36发展而来)在七个患者/人群组(慢性阻塞性呼吸道疾病、骨关节炎、肠易激综合征、下腰痛、皮肤溃疡、绝经后妇女和老年人)中进行了比较。SF-6D指数值比EQ-5D平均高0.045,组内相关系数为0.51。虽然这种趋同为这些测量的有效性提供了一些支持,但总体水平上的微小差异掩盖了患者组之间的一致性和疾病严重程度上的更显著差异,SF-6D具有较小的范围和较低的值差异。在SF-6D中有地板效应的证据,在EQ-5D中有天花板效应。这些差异是由于他们的健康状况分类和评估方法的不同造成的。需要进一步研究,以充分了解描述性系统和评估方法的各自作用,并审查对卫生保健干预影响估计的影响。版权所有(C)2004 John Wiley Sons,Ltd.
As the number of preference-based instruments grows, it becomes increasingly important to compare different preference-based measures of health in order to inform an important debate on the choice of instrument. This paper presents a comparison of two of them, the EQ-5D and the SF-6D (recently developed from the SF-36) across seven patient/population groups (chronic obstructive airways disease, osteoarthritis, irritable bowel syndrome, lower back pain, lea ulcers, post menopausal women and elderly). The mean SF-6D index value was found to exceed the EQ-5D by 0.045 and the intraclass correlation coefficient between them was 0.51. Whilst this convergence lends some support for the validity of these measures, the modest difference at the aggregate level masks more significant differences in agreement across the patient groups and over severity of illness, with the SF-6D having a smaller range and lower variance in values. There is evidence for floor effects in the SF-6D and ceiling effects in the EQ-5D. These discrepancies arise from differences in their health state classifications and the methods used to value them. Further research is required to fully understand the respective roles of the descriptive systems and the valuation methods and to examine the implications for estimates of the impact of health care interventions. Copyright (C) 2004 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.