The impact of a revised EQ-5D population scoring on preference-based utility scores in an inflammatory arthritis cohort.
Name:
Publisher version
View Source
Access full-text PDFOpen Access
View Source
Check access options
Check access options
Authors
Adams, RoisinCraig, Benjamin M
Walsh, Cathal D
Veale, Douglas J
Bresnihan, Barry
FitzGerald, Oliver
Barry, Michael
Affiliation
National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics, St. James Hospital, Dublin, Ireland., radams@stjames.ieIssue Date
2012-02-01T10:46:03ZMeSH
AdolescentAdult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Arthritis, Psoriatic/economics/*physiopathology/psychology
Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics/*physiopathology/psychology
Cohort Studies
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Female
*Health Status
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Models, Economic
Quality of Life
*Questionnaires
Young Adult
Metadata
Show full item recordCitation
Value Health. 2011 Sep-Oct;14(6):921-7. Epub 2011 Jul 8.Journal
Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics , and Outcomes ResearchDOI
10.1016/j.jval.2011.03.002PubMed ID
21914514Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: It is well established that there are problems with the EQ-5D. This is due to the original scoring methods used and how negative time trade-off (TTO) values were treated. A revised scoring method has been published. This article applies this to an inflammatory arthritis cohort. The objective is to examine the impact of a revised scoring system for the EQ-5D (UK) TTO on the utility estimates and in the case of rheumatoid arthritis, to explore the impact of using different utility metrics on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) results of an economic model. METHODS: A total of 504 patients with inflammatory arthritis were rescored using revised EQ-5D scoring, which uses an episodic random utility model to deal with negative TTO values. Differences in utility scores were compared and the new mapping coefficients were obtained. These were then used in an economic model to examine the impact on the ICER. RESULTS: In rheumatoid arthritis, the overall change is less for the revised EQ-5D scoring than with the original EQ-5D (TTO) but greater than the SF-6D: EQ-5D UK -0.22 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.30 to -0.15), revised EQ-5D UK -0.16 (95% CI -0.21 to -0.10) and SF-6D -0.08 (95% CI -0.11 to -0.05). A similar trend is seen in the psoriatic arthritis group. The economic model produced different ICERs, when different utility measures were used; EQ-5D (TTO) euro42,402, SF-6D euro111,788, and revised EQ-5D (TTO) euro57,747. CONCLUSION: In the context of inflammatory arthritis, this article demonstrates that a revised scoring for EQ-5D may have a significant impact on utility estimates and on the output of the economic model.Language
engISSN
1524-4733 (Electronic)1098-3015 (Linking)
ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1016/j.jval.2011.03.002