Health-related Quality of Life using the EQ-5D-5L: normative utility scores in a Dutch female population

Abstract

Purpose Normative utility scores represent the health related quality of life of the general population, are of utmost importance in cost-effectiveness studies and should reflect relevant sexes and age groups. The aim of this study was to estimate EQ-5D-5L normative utility scores in a population of Dutch females, stratified by age, and to compare these scores to those of female populations of three other countries. Methods Dutch women completed the EQ-5D-5L online between January and July 2020. Mean normative utilities were computed using the Dutch EQ-5D-5L value set, stratified by age, tested for differences using the Kruskall–Wallis test, and compared to normative utility scores of female populations elsewhere. Additionally, to support the use of the Dutch EQ-5D-5L data in other settings, normative utility scores were also calculated by applying the value sets of Germany, United Kingdom and USA. Results Data of 9037 women were analyzed and the weighted mean utility score was 0.911 (SD 0.155, 95% CI 0.908–0.914). The mean normative utility scores differed between age groups, showing lower scores in older females. Compared to other normative utility scores of female populations, Dutch mean utilities were consistently higher except for age groups 18–24 and 25–34. With the three country-specific value sets, new age-specific mean normative utility scores were provided. Conclusion This study provides mean normative utility scores of a large cohort of Dutch females per age group, which were found to be lower in older age groups. Utility scores calculated with three other value sets were made available.

Health utility values of breast cancer treatments and the impact of varying quality of life assumptions on cost‐effectiveness

“…Utility scores at diagnosis were used in the analyses for a duration of 1 month, treatment scores for the following 11 months and recovery scores for the subsequent 1 year. Furthermore, screening and follow‐up utility values were similar to Kregting et al and normative utility values were age and gender specific 32,33 …”

“…Given that the normative utility values from Clarijs et al were retrieved from a large population of women in the Netherlands and were stratified by both gender and age, these parameters can be considered best estimates. 33 Because the QALY estimates in the analyses using only gender specific utility values were quite similar to QALY estimates using gender and age specific utility values, we conclude that? gender specific utility values can be used in the absence of gender and age stratified normative utility values.…”

“…First, cost‐effectiveness analyses were performed using different utility sets for the normative health state (ie, the average health state of a comparative population without the disease of interest). Normative utility values which were applied were perfect health (utility score of 1), gender specific (0.858) 29 and gender and age specific 33 (Table 1). Breast cancer treatment and screening and follow‐up utility values were used as in the study by Kregting et al 32 …”

“…Furthermore, screening and follow-up utility values were similar to Kregting et al and normative utility values were age and gender specific. 32,33…”

“…Furthermore, breast cancer treatment utility values were similar to Kregting et al and normative utility values were age and gender specific. 32,33 For some treatment categories, no patient data were available to calculate utility values for. This was the case for some treatment options in the age group 75 years and older.…”