Comparison of EQ-5D and SF-36 in untreated patients with symptoms of intermittent claudication

Anil Vaidya*, Marie-Claire Kleinegris, Johan L. Severens, Bram L. Ramaekers, Arina J. ten Cate-Hoek, Hugo ten Cate, Manuela A. Joore

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

6 Citations (Web of Science)
35 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Aim: To compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) descriptions and utility scores in newly diagnosed peripheral arterial disease (PAD) patients, using two most widely used instruments, EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D) and Medical Outcome Study 36-item Short-Form Health Status Survey (SF-36). Methods: Patients' self-assessment of HRQoL was measured by the Dutch versions of the EQ-5D and SF-36 in the 204 patients. Results: Mean utility scores ranged from 0.675 for Short-Form Six-Dimension, 0.648 for the EQ-5D UK tariff and 0.715 for the Dutch EQ-5D tariff. A moderate correlation between the utility scores was found due to different valuation techniques of these instruments. Conclusion: Both instruments have clinical validity for use in the PAD and can be used alongside each other to provide a holistic assessment of the HRQoL. Before using these two instruments interchangeably for utility score calculations and healthcare resource allocation, a thorough sensitivity analysis is necessary to explore the robustness of the value argument based on these utility scores.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)535-548
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Volume7
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2018

Keywords

  • EuroQol 5D
  • health-related quality of life
  • peripheral arterial disease
  • short-form 36
  • QUALITY-OF-LIFE
  • PERIPHERAL ARTERIAL-DISEASE
  • ANKLE BRACHIAL INDEX
  • HEALTH-STATUS
  • MODELING VALUATIONS
  • COST-UTILITY
  • EUROQOL
  • MANAGEMENT
  • COMMUNITY
  • AWARENESS

Cite this