A comparison of four different approaches to measuring health utility in depressed patients

Abstract

BackgroundA variety of instruments are used to measure health related quality of life. Few data exist on the performance and agreement of different instruments in a depressed population. The aim of this study was to investigate agreement between, and suitability of, the EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-5D VAS), SF-6D and SF-12 new algorithm for measuring health utility in depressed patients.MethodsThe intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland and Altman approaches were used to assess agreement. Instrument sensitivity was analysed by: (1) plotting utility scores for the instruments against one another; (2) correlating utility scores and depressive symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)); and (3) using Tukey’s procedure. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis assessed instrument responsiveness to change. Acceptability was assessed by comparing instrument completion rates.ResultsThe overall ICC was 0.57. Bland and Altman plots showed wide limits of agreement for each pair wise comparison, except between the SF-6D and SF-12 new algorithm. Plots of utility scores displayed ’ceiling effects’ in the EQ-5D-3L index and ’floor effects’ in the SF-6D and SF-12 new algorithm. All instruments showed a negative monotonic relationship with BDI, but the EQ-5D-3L index and EQ-5D VAS could not differentiate between depression severity sub-groups. The SF-based instruments were better able to detect changes in health state over time. There was no difference in completion rates of the four instruments.ConclusionsThere was a lack of agreement between utility scores generated by the different instruments. According to the criteria of sensitivity, responsiveness and acceptability that we applied, the SF-6D and SF-12 may be more suitable for the measurement of health related utility in a depressed population than the EQ-5D-3L, which is the instrument currently recommended by NICE.

An empirical evaluation of the SF-12, SF-6D, EQ-5D and Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire in patients with rheumatoid arthritis of the hand

“…The acceptability of the different study PROMs was measured using completion rates at baseline and each of the two follow up time points (4 and 12 months post randomisation) [29, 30]. …”

The impact of the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme, 2003–13: a multimethod evaluation

“…Wright et al (2014) 25 provided evidence that the programme is supporting research of clinical relevance. Turner et al (2013) 26 found that 95.7% of all HTA studies either have published, or will publish, a monograph in the HTA journal, and that that percentage increases to 98% for studies commissioned after 2002. Chinnery et al (2013) 27 showed that these publications were available promptly.…”

“…753 They also worked out effective ways of conducting large-scale trials in primary care (interviewee).…”

“…760 They investigated the differences between four different approaches to measuring health utility in depressed patients, and found that there was a lack of agreement between utility scores generated by the different instruments. 753 They also published the protocol that they used for the trial.…”

Measuring functional recovery in stroke patients: the responsiveness of ACTIVLIM-Stroke

“…Turner et al 6 reported that an instrument measuring health status should be responsive to changes. Consequently, responsiveness, which reflects the ability of a questionnaire to detect changes over time, is an important psychometric quality and an essential criterion for instrument selection when measuring stroke patient function.…”