Comparison of EQ-5D-5L health state utilities using four country-specific tariffs on a breast cancer patient sample in mainland China
Authors Liu L, Li SP, Wang M, Chen G
Received 26 March 2017
Accepted for publication 29 May 2017
Published 23 June 2017 Volume 2017:11 Pages 1049—1056
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewers approved by Dr Amy Norman
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Naifeng Liu
Liu Liu,1,2 Shunping Li,1,2 Min Wang,3 Gang Chen4
1School of Health Care Management, Shandong University, Jinan, China; 2Key Laboratory of Health Economics and Policy Research, NHFPC (Shandong University), Jinan, China; 3Qingdao Municipal Hospital, Qingdao, China; 4Flinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, School of Medicine, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia
Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the differences in the five-level EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D-5L) health state utility scores derived from Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and UK tariffs.
Methods: Six hundred and twenty-one breast cancer patients were invited for a face-to-face interview in Qingdao Municipal Hospital, China. EQ-5D-5L was scored using tariffs from China, Japan, Korea, and the UK. The null hypothesis of normal distribution of the EQ-5D-5L utility score was tested by the Shapiro–Wilk test. Nonparametric Friedman test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to determine the difference among the four tariffs. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland–Altman plots were used to study the agreement among the four EQ-5D-5L scores. Known-groups validity was studied using a regression framework.
Results: There were 608 participants in the final analysis, with a mean ± standard deviation (SD) age of 48.0±9.6 years. EQ-5D-5L utility scores were non-normally distributed. The means (median) ± SD of EQ-5D-5L utilities derived from Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and UK tariffs were 0.828 (0.879) ±0.184, 0.802 (0.823) ±0.164, 0.831 (0.829) ±0.137, and 0.838 (0.866) ±0.154, respectively. Among pairwise comparisons, the difference of median EQ-5D-5L utility scores was only insignificant between Chinese and UK tariffs. Excellent agreements (with ICCs >0.9) were found among the four tariffs albeit the limits of agreement between each pair of tariffs were wide. Known-groups validity was supported.
Conclusion: Although four country-specific EQ-5D-5L tariffs have shown an overall high level of correlation and agreement, none of them could be regarded as interchangeable. The higher correlation and agreement between Chinese and UK tariffs may be due to the similar functions that were used in the tariff development. In the absence of Chinese-specific tariff, the UK tariff is the second-best option to be applied in the Chinese population. Results of this study further contribute to the explanation of variations among country-specific tariffs.
Keywords: breast cancer, EQ-5D-5L, multi-attribute utility instrument, preference weights, value sets, health state utility, China
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]