IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v11y2014i4p4280-4291d35171.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing the Visual Analogue Scale and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory for Measuring Health-Related Quality of Life in Children with Oral Clefts

Author

Listed:
  • George L. Wehby

    (Departments of Health Management and Policy, Economics, and Preventive and Community Dentistry, and Public Policy Center, University of Iowa, 145 N. Riverside Dr. 100 College of Public Health Building, Room N248, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA)

  • Hodad Naderi

    (Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA)

  • James M. Robbins

    (Departments of Pediatrics and Psychiatry, University of Arkansas, 1 Children's Way, Little Rock, AR 72202, USA)

  • Timothy N. Ansley

    (Psychological and Quantitative Foundations, University of Iowa, 314 LC, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA)

  • Peter C. Damiano

    (Department of Preventive and Community Dentistry and Public Policy Center, University of Iowa, 212 SQ, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA)

Abstract

Objectives : To evaluate the performance of the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), in measuring overall health-related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in children with oral clefts relative to the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory 4.0 (PedsQL TM ) Generic Core Scales, one of the most validated and commonly used methods to measure pediatric HRQoL. Methods : The study included a population-based sample of 307 children aged 5 to 10 years who were born in Iowa, New York, and Arkansas with non-syndromic oral clefts. Data on HRQoL were obtained using a VAS and PedsQL TM via self-administered interviews with the parents. We evaluated the correlations between the VAS and PedsQL TM total scores, and the correlations of each of these two scales with a series of child health and wellbeing indicators. Results : The VAS and PedsQL TM scores were well-correlated ( r = 0.67). There were no prominent differences between the correlations of VAS and PedsQL TM with the selected indicators of child health and wellbeing; differences in correlations were less than 0.1. Differences in HRQoL by cleft type were more pronounced on the PedsQL TM . Conclusions : Our study finds the VAS to perform relatively well in measuring overall HRQoL among children with oral clefts. The VAS may be useful as a screening tool to identify children with oral clefts at risk of low HRQoL for referral into more comprehensive evaluations and for measuring average HRQoL across a sample of children.

Suggested Citation

  • George L. Wehby & Hodad Naderi & James M. Robbins & Timothy N. Ansley & Peter C. Damiano, 2014. "Comparing the Visual Analogue Scale and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory for Measuring Health-Related Quality of Life in Children with Oral Clefts," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-12, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:11:y:2014:i:4:p:4280-4291:d:35171
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/11/4/4280/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/11/4/4280/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Parkin & Nancy Devlin, 2006. "Is there a case for using visual analogue scale valuations in cost‐utility analysis?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(7), pages 653-664, July.
    2. George W. Torrance & David Feeny & William Furlong, 2001. "Visual Analog Scales," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 21(4), pages 329-334, August.
    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. Hildegard Seidl & Matthias Hunger & Reiner Leidl & Christa Meisinger & Rupert Wende & Bernhard Kuch & Rolf Holle, 2015. "Cost-effectiveness of nurse-based case management versus usual care for elderly patients with myocardial infarction: results from the KORINNA study," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(6), pages 671-681, July.
    2. Mara Airoldi & Alec Morton & Jenifer A. E. Smith & Gwyn Bevan, 2014. "STAR—People-Powered Prioritization," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 34(8), pages 965-975, November.
    3. David Parkin & Nancy Devlin, 2006. "Is there a case for using visual analogue scale valuations in cost‐utility analysis?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(7), pages 653-664, July.
    4. Abellán Perpiñán, José Mª & Sánchez Martínez,Fernando I. & Martínez Pérez, Jorge E., 2007. "La medición del bienestar social relacionado con la salud/The Measurement of the Health Related Social Welfare," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 25, pages 927-950, Diciembre.
    5. Ryan, Mandy & Kinghorn, Philip & Entwistle, Vikki A. & Francis, Jill J., 2014. "Valuing patients' experiences of healthcare processes: Towards broader applications of existing methods," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 194-203.
    6. Hui-Chuan Huang & Meei-Ling Shyu & Mei-Feng Lin & Chaur-Jong Hu & Chien-Hung Chang & Hsin-Chien Lee & Nai-Fang Chi & Hsiu-Ju Chang, 2017. "Validation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation of a Chinese Version of the Emotional and Social Dysfunction Questionnaire in Stroke Patients," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 26(6), pages 763-782, December.
    7. Khadka, Jyoti & Kwon, Joseph & Petrou, Stavros & Lancsar, Emily & Ratcliffe, Julie, 2019. "Mind the (inter-rater) gap. An investigation of self-reported versus proxy-reported assessments in the derivation of childhood utility values for economic evaluation: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    8. Seda Erdem & Danny Campbell, 2017. "Preferences for public involvement in health service decisions: a comparison between best-worst scaling and trio-wise stated preference elicitation techniques," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 18(9), pages 1107-1123, December.
    9. Peter Wahlqvist & Gordon Guyatt & David Armstrong & Alessio Degl’Innocenti & Diane Heels-Ansdell & Samer El-Dika & Ingela Wiklund & Carlo Fallone & Lisa Tanser & Sander Zanten & Peggy Austin & Alan Ba, 2007. "The Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire for Patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (WPAI-GERD)," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 385-396, May.
    10. Maria Öjmyr-Joelsson & Margret Nisell & Björn Frenckner & Per-Anders Rydelius & Kyllike Christensson, 2006. "Parental Experiences: Care of Children With High and Intermediate Imperforate Anus," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 15(4), pages 290-305, November.
    11. Koonal K. Shah & Juan Manuel Ramos-Goñi & Simone Kreimeier & Nancy J. Devlin, 2020. "An exploration of methods for obtaining 0 = dead anchors for latent scale EQ-5D-Y values," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(7), pages 1091-1103, September.
    12. Rachel Lee-Yin Tan & Zhihao Yang & Ataru Igarashi & Michael Herdman & Nan Luo, 2021. "How Do Respondents Interpret and View the EQ-VAS? A Qualitative Study of Three Asian Populations," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 14(2), pages 283-293, March.
    13. Buckingham, Ken J. & Devlin, Nancy Joy, 2009. "A note on the nature of utility in time and health and implications for cost utility analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 362-367, January.
    14. Christine McDonough & Anna Tosteson, 2007. "Measuring Preferences for Cost-Utility Analysis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 93-106, February.
    15. Hirsch Ruchlin & Ralph Insinga, 2008. "A Review of Health-Utility Data for Osteoarthritis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(11), pages 925-935, November.
    16. Stavros Petrou & Joseph Kwon & Jason Madan, 2018. "A Practical Guide to Conducting a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Health State Utility Values," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(9), pages 1043-1061, September.
    17. S. A. Lipman & V. T. Reckers-Droog & M. Karimi & M. Jakubczyk & A. E. Attema, 2021. "Self vs. other, child vs. adult. An experimental comparison of valuation perspectives for valuation of EQ-5D-Y-3L health states," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(9), pages 1507-1518, December.
    18. Kyra Kneis & Afschin Gandjour, 2009. "Economic evaluation of Sinfrontal®in the treatment of acute maxillary sinusitis in adults," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 181-191, September.
    19. Marie-Josée Dion & Pierre Tousignant & Jean Bourbeau & Dick Menzies & Kevin Schwartzman, 2002. "Measurement of Health Preferences among Patients with Tuberculous Infection and Disease," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 22(1_suppl), pages 102-114, September.
    20. Zsombor Zrubka & Zoltán Hermann & László Gulácsi & Valentin Brodszky & Fanni Rencz & Márta Péntek, 2019. "Determinants of the acceptability of health problems in different ages: exploring a new application of the EQ VAS," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(1), pages 31-41, June.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:11:y:2014:i:4:p:4280-4291:d:35171. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.