IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v20y2019i5d10.1007_s10198-018-1026-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A head-to-head comparison of five-level (EQ-5D-5L-Y) and three-level EQ-5D-Y questionnaires in paediatric patients

Author

Listed:
  • Carlos King Ho Wong

    (The University of Hong Kong)

  • Prudence Wing Hang Cheung

    (The University of Hong Kong)

  • Nan Luo

    (National University of Singapore)

  • Jason Pui Yin Cheung

    (The University of Hong Kong)

Abstract

Purpose The aim of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of a youth version of the EQ-5D five-level questionnaire (5LY) and its three-level version (3LY) in a sample of Chinese paediatric patients. Methods A consecutive sample of idiopathic scoliosis patients were recruited from a referral outpatient scoliosis center at Hong Kong, China in October 2017 and completed the two versions of EQ-5D-Y. Redistribution properties in each dimension of EQ-5D-Y were analyzed between 5LY and 3LY by logistics regressions. Absolute reduction and relative reduction in ceiling effects from the 3LY to the 5LY were calculated. Test–retest reliability was assessed by examining the Gwet’s agreement coefficient (Gwet’s AC) for five individual dimension responses over the 2-week period. Results A total of 129 idiopathic scoliosis patients completed the two versions of EQ-5D-Y at baseline assessment, among which 70 patients completed the test–retest interview in 2–3 weeks after baseline assessment. For redistribution properties, the proportion of inconsistency was low in all the dimensions, ranging from 0.0% (“Usual activities”) to 3.9% (“Pain/discomfort”). Ceiling effects were reduced in four dimensions. “Usual activities” dimension showed significant reduction (absolute and relative reductions: 3.9% and 4.3%; p = 0.025) and the “worried/sad/unhappy” dimension showed the largest significant reduction in ceiling effects (absolute and relative reductions: 7.8% and 9.8%; p = 0.012). The 3LY and 5LY showed very good agreement (> 80%) of individual dimension responses between two assessments, except for the “worried/sad/unhappy” dimension in 3LY. Conclusion Through this head-to-head comparison, the 5LY had significant improvements in ceiling effects in two dimensions when compared to 3LY but other measurement properties of 3LY and 5LY performed similar in the idiopathic scoliosis patient group.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos King Ho Wong & Prudence Wing Hang Cheung & Nan Luo & Jason Pui Yin Cheung, 2019. "A head-to-head comparison of five-level (EQ-5D-5L-Y) and three-level EQ-5D-Y questionnaires in paediatric patients," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(5), pages 647-656, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:20:y:2019:i:5:d:10.1007_s10198-018-1026-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-018-1026-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-018-1026-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-018-1026-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mathieu F. Janssen & Gouke J. Bonsel & Nan Luo, 2018. "Is EQ-5D-5L Better Than EQ-5D-3L? A Head-to-Head Comparison of Descriptive Systems and Value Sets from Seven Countries," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 675-697, June.
    2. Gang Chen & Julie Ratcliffe, 2015. "A Review of the Development and Application of Generic Multi-Attribute Utility Instruments for Paediatric Populations," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(10), pages 1013-1028, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ratcliffe, Julie & Huynh, Elisabeth & Chen, Gang & Stevens, Katherine & Swait, Joffre & Brazier, John & Sawyer, Michael & Roberts, Rachel & Flynn, Terry, 2016. "Valuing the Child Health Utility 9D: Using profile case best worst scaling methods to develop a new adolescent specific scoring algorithm," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 48-59.
    2. Kim Dalziel & Max Catchpool & Borja García-Lorenzo & Inigo Gorostiza & Richard Norman & Oliver Rivero-Arias, 2020. "Feasibility, Validity and Differences in Adolescent and Adult EQ-5D-Y Health State Valuation in Australia and Spain: An Application of Best–Worst Scaling," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(5), pages 499-513, May.
    3. Clara Mukuria & Donna Rowen & Sue Harnan & Andrew Rawdin & Ruth Wong & Roberta Ara & John Brazier, 2019. "An Updated Systematic Review of Studies Mapping (or Cross-Walking) Measures of Health-Related Quality of Life to Generic Preference-Based Measures to Generate Utility Values," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 295-313, June.
    4. Valentina Prevolnik Rupel & Marko Ogorevc, 2021. "EQ-5D-Y Value Set for Slovenia," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(4), pages 463-471, April.
    5. Ramesh Lamsal & Jennifer D. Zwicker, 2017. "Economic Evaluation of Interventions for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders: Opportunities and Challenges," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 763-772, December.
    6. Husbands, Samantha & Mitchell, Paul Mark & Kinghorn, Philip & Byford, Sarah & Bailey, Cara & Anand, Paul & Peters, Tim J. & Floredin, Isabella & Coast, Joanna, 2024. "Is well-becoming important for children and young people? Evidence from in-depth interviews with children and young people and their parents," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 122060, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Wenjing Zhou & Anle Shen & Zhihao Yang & Pei Wang & Bin Wu & Michael Herdman & Nan Luo, 2021. "Patient-caregiver agreement and test–retest reliability of the EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L in paediatric patients with haematological malignancies," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(7), pages 1103-1113, September.
    8. Jiaer Lin & Carlos King Ho Wong & Jason Pui Yin Cheung & Prudence Wing Hang Cheung & Nan Luo, 2022. "Psychometric performance of proxy-reported EQ-5D youth version 5-level (EQ-5D-Y-5L) in comparison with three-level (EQ-5D-Y-3L) in children and adolescents with scoliosis," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(8), pages 1383-1395, November.
    9. Hani Dimassi & Soumana C. Nasser & Aline Issa & Sarine S. Adrian & Bassima Hazimeh, 2021. "Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Health Conditions in Lebanese Community Setting," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-12, August.
    10. Nancy J. Devlin & Koonal K. Shah & Brendan J. Mulhern & Krystallia Pantiri & Ben van Hout, 2019. "A new method for valuing health: directly eliciting personal utility functions," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(2), pages 257-270, March.
    11. Samantha Husbands & Paul Mark Mitchell & Joanna Coast, 2020. "A Systematic Review of the Use and Quality of Qualitative Methods in Concept Elicitation for Measures with Children and Young People," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 13(3), pages 257-288, June.
    12. Joseph Kwon & Sung Wook Kim & Wendy J. Ungar & Kate Tsiplova & Jason Madan & Stavros Petrou, 2018. "A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Childhood Health Utilities," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(3), pages 277-305, April.
    13. Shengxiang Sang & Wei Liao & Ning Kang & Xueyan Wu & Ze Hu & Xiaotian Liu & Hongjian Zhang & Chongjian Wang, 2024. "Health-related quality of life assessed by EQ-5D-5L and its determinants among rural adults: result from the Henan rural cohort study," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(1), pages 21-30, February.
    14. Moustapha Touré & Christian R. C. Kouakou & Thomas G. Poder, 2021. "Dimensions Used in Instruments for QALY Calculation: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-22, April.
    15. Karin Dam Petersen & Gang Chen & Christine Mpundu-Kaambwa & Katherine Stevens & John Brazier & Julie Ratcliffe, 2018. "Measuring Health-Related Quality of Life in Adolescent Populations: An Empirical Comparison of the CHU9D and the PedsQLTM 4.0 Short Form 15," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 11(1), pages 29-37, February.
    16. Guizhi Weng & Yanming Hong & Nan Luo & Clara Mukuria & Jie Jiang & Zhihao Yang & Sha Li, 2023. "Comparing EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in measuring the HRQoL burden of 4 health conditions in China," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(2), pages 197-207, March.
    17. Kamilla Koszorú & Krisztina Hajdu & Valentin Brodszky & Alex Bató & L. Hunor Gergely & Anikó Kovács & Zsuzsanna Beretzky & Miklós Sárdy & Andrea Szegedi & Fanni Rencz, 2023. "Comparing the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L descriptive systems and utilities in atopic dermatitis," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(1), pages 139-152, February.
    18. Ruvini M. Hettiarachchi & Peter Arrow & Sameera Senanayake & Hannah Carter & David Brain & Richard Norman & Utsana Tonmukayawul & Lisa Jamieson & Sanjeewa Kularatna, 2023. "Developing an Australian utility value set for the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale-4D (ECOHIS-4D) using a discrete choice experiment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(8), pages 1285-1296, November.
    19. Marion Egger & Lena Vogelgesang & Judith Reitelbach & Jeannine Bergmann & Friedemann Müller & Klaus Jahn, 2023. "Severe Post-COVID-19 Condition after Mild Infection: Physical and Mental Health Eight Months Post Infection: A Cross-Sectional Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(1), pages 1-14, December.
    20. Finch, Aureliano Paolo & Mulhern, Brendan, 2022. "Where do measures of health, social care and wellbeing fit within a wider measurement framework? Implications for the measurement of quality of life and the identification of bolt-ons," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    EQ-5D-5L; EQ-5D-Y; Children; Youth; Psychometric properties; Idiopathic scoliosis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General
    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:20:y:2019:i:5:d:10.1007_s10198-018-1026-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.