A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis
A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.08.034
复制
发表时间：
2005-04-01
影响因子：
5.4
通讯作者：
Anis, AH
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Marra, CA;Woolcott, JC;Anis, AH
风湿性关节炎（RA）是一种常见的慢性疾病，其中健康相关的生活质量（HRQL）是治疗的主要目标之一。因此，用于测量RA HRQL的工具必须能够区分RA的严重程度。用于测量HRQL的两个基本类别的工具是通用工具和疾病特异性工具。通用工具可以进一步细分为基于偏好的措施，产生单一和多属性的效用值锚定在零（死亡）和1.00（完美的健康）作为HRQL的措施。从这些类型的工具的分数可以集成到成本效用分析作为质量调整生命年的权重。我们评估了四个通用偏好为基础的措施效用分数的结构效度（健康效用指数2和3（HUI 2，HUI 3），EuroQol 5D（EQ-5D），SF-6D和疾病特异性测量（风湿性关节炎生活质量问卷（RAQoL）和健康评估问卷（HAQ）），在不列颠哥伦比亚省的313例RA患者的样本中，加拿大我们还估计了每项措施的最小重要差异（MID）。一般来说，正如预期的那样，疾病特异性指标能够更好地区分RA严重程度较高的组;然而，每个量表的效用评分似乎也能很好地区分RA严重程度类别。MID值与文献中先前报告的HUI 2、SF-6D和HAQ一致，并提供了HUI 3、EQ-5D和RAQoL的新信息。我们的结论是，所有的偏好为基础的效用的措施，进行了评估，似乎充分区分不同程度的类风湿关节炎的严重程度。(C)2004爱思唯尔有限公司保留所有权利。
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a common, chronic disease where health-related quality of life (HRQL) is one of the main goals of therapy. As such, instruments used to measure HRQL in RA must be able to discriminate across RA severity. The two basic categories of instruments used to measure HRQL are generic instruments and disease-specific instruments. Generic instruments can be further subdivided into preference-based measures which yield both single and multi-attribute utility values anchored at zero (death) and 1.00 (perfect health) as a measure of HRQL. The scores from these types of instruments can be integrated into cost-utility analyses as the weightings for quality adjusted life years. We assessed the construct validity of utility scores from four generic preference-based measures (the Health Utilities Index 2 and 3 (HUI2, HUI3), the EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D), and the Short Form 6-D (SF-6D) and disease specific measures (the Rheumatoid Arthritis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RAQoL) and the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)) in a sample of 313 RA patients in British Columbia, Canada. We also estimated the minimally important differences (MID) for each of the measures. Generally, as anticipated, the disease-specific measures were better able to discriminate across groups with higher RA severity; however, utility scores from each of the scales also appeared to discriminate well across RA severity categories. The MID values agreed with those previously reported in the literature for the HUI2, SF-6D and the HAQ and provided new information for the HUI3, EQ-5D and the RAQoL. We conclude that the all of the preference-based utility measures that were evaluated appear to adequately discriminate across levels of RA severity. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.