nach oben

Quality of Life Research

Erschienen in:

30.07.2019

Evaluating a falls prevention intervention in older home care recipients: a comparison of SF-6D and EQ-5D

verfasst von: Maria Bjerk, Therese Brovold, Jennifer C. Davis, Astrid Bergland

Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research | Ausgabe 12/2019

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Purpose

Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is an important outcome in economic evaluations of health care interventions for older adults. The aim of this study was to compare two commonly used preference-based utility measures, SF-6D and EQ-5D, to provide knowledge on their applicability when evaluating falls prevention interventions in primary health care.

Methods

The study is a secondary analysis of longitudinal data from a randomised controlled trial, which included 155 older home care recipients participating in a falls prevention intervention in Norway. HRQOL was measured by SF-6D and EQ-5D. Physical function was measured by Berg Balance Scale, 4-m walk test, 30-s sit-to-stand and Falls Efficacy Scale International. Assessments were performed at baseline, 3 months and 6 months. The agreement between SF-6D and EQ-5D was examined using Bland–Altman plots and Spearman correlations. Elasticities from regression analysis were employed to compare the instruments’ responsiveness.

Results

SF-6D and EQ-5D were strongly correlated (0.71), but there were differences in the instruments’ agreement and domains of HRQOL covered. Participants with a higher mean HRQOL and/or better physical function scored generally higher on EQ-5D. Participants with a lower mean HRQOL and/or poorer physical function achieved a relatively higher score on SF-6D. EQ-5D was more responsive to changes in physical function compared to SF-6D.

Conclusions

SF-6D and EQ-5D have both similarities and differences regarding sensitivity, domains covered and responsiveness to changes when evaluating a falls prevention intervention. Selecting the appropriate instrument depends on the characteristics of the participants and the intervention being evaluated.

Vorheriger Artikel Mapping the Shah-modified Barthel Index to the Health Utility Index Mark III by the Mean Rank Method

Nächster Artikel German value sets for the EORTC QLU-C10D, a cancer-specific utility instrument based on the EORTC QLQ-C30

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

World Health Organization. (2015). World report on ageing and health. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

Kannus, P., Sievänen, H., Palvanen, M., Järvinen, T., & Parkkari, J. (2005). Prevention of falls and consequent injuries in elderly people. The Lancet,366(9500), 1885–1893. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67604-0.CrossRef

Stenhagen, M., Ekstrom, H., Nordell, E., & Elmstahl, S. (2014). Accidental falls, health-related quality of life and life satisfaction: A prospective study of the general elderly population. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics,58(1), 95–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2013.07.006.CrossRefPubMed

Davis, J. C., Best, J. R., Dian, L., Khan, K. M., Hsu, C. L., Chan, W., et al. (2017). Are the EQ-5D-3L and the ICECAP-O responsive among older adults with impaired mobility? Evidence from the Vancouver Falls Prevention Cohort Study. Quality of Life Research,26(3), 737–747. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1487-z.CrossRefPubMed

Bjerk, M., Brovold, T., Skelton, D. A., & Bergland, A. (2018). Associations between health-related quality of life, physical function and fear of falling in older fallers receiving home care. BMC Geriatrics,18(1), 253. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-018-0945-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Fletcher, P. C., & Hirdes, J. P. (2004). Restriction in activity associated with fear of falling among community-based seniors using home care services. Age and Ageing,33(3), 273–279. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afh077.CrossRefPubMed

Hektoen, L. F., Aas, E., & Lurås, H. (2009). Cost-effectiveness in fall prevention for older women. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health,37(6), 584–589. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494809341093.CrossRefPubMed

Gillespie, L. D., Robertson, M. C., Gillespie, W. J., Sherrington, C., Gates, S., Clemson, L. M., et al. (2012). Interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007146.pub3.CrossRefPubMed

El-Khoury, F., Cassou, B., Charles, M.-A., & Dargent-Molina, P. (2013). The effect of fall prevention exercise programmes on fall induced injuries in community dwelling older adults: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ,347, f6234. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f6234.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Drummond, M. F., Sculpher, M. J., Claxton, K., Stoddart, G. L., & Torrance, G. W. (2015). Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes (4th ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

11.

Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Tsuchiya, A., & Busschbach, J. (2004). A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Economics,13(9), 873–884. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.866.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Haywood, K., Garratt, A., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2005). Quality of life in older people: A structured review of generic self-assessed health instruments. Quality of Life Research,14(7), 1651–1668. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-005-1743-0.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Gerard, K., Nicholson, T., Mullee, M., Mehta, R., & Roderick, P. (2004). EQ-5D versus SF-6D in an older, chronically ill patient group. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy,3(2), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.2165/00148365-200403020-00005.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Petrou, S., & Hockley, C. (2005). An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population. Health Economics,14(11), 1169–1189. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1006.CrossRefPubMed

15.

van Stel, H. F., & Buskens, E. (2006). Comparison of the SF-6D and the EQ-5D in patients with coronary heart disease. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes,4(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Cunillera, O., Tresserras, R., Rajmil, L., Vilagut, G., Brugulat, P., Herdman, M., et al. (2010). Discriminative capacity of the EQ-5D, SF-6D, and SF-12 as measures of health status in population health survey. Quality of Life Research,19(6), 853–864. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9639-z.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Chen, J., Wong, C. K., McGhee, S. M., Pang, P. K., & Yu, W.-C. (2014). A comparison between the EQ-5D and the SF-6D in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). PLoS ONE,9(11), e112389. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112389.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Kontodimopoulos, N., Pappa, E., Papadopoulos, A. A., Tountas, Y., & Niakas, D. (2009). Comparing SF-6D and EQ-5D utilities across groups differing in health status. Quality of Life Research,18(1), 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9420-8.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Lamers, L., Bouwmans, C., van Straten, A., Donker, M., & Hakkaart, L. (2006). Comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities in mental health patients. Health Economics,15(11), 1229–1236. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1125.CrossRefPubMed

20.

McDonough, C. M., & Tosteson, A. N. (2007). Measuring preferences for cost-utility analysis: How choice of method may influence decision-making. Pharmacoeconomics,25(2), 93–106. https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200725020-00003.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Joore, M., Brunenberg, D., Nelemans, P., Wouters, E., Kuijpers, P., Honig, A., et al. (2010). The impact of differences in EQ-5D and SF-6D utility scores on the acceptability of cost-utility ratios: Results across five trial-based cost–utility studies. Value in Health,13(2), 222–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00669.x.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Bjerk, M., Brovold, T., Skelton, D. A., & Bergland, A. (2017). A falls prevention programme to improve quality of life, physical function and falls efficacy in older people receiving home help services: Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. BMC Health Services Research,17(1), 559. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2516-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Bjerk, M., Brovold, T., Skelton, D. A., Liu-Ambrose, T., & Bergland, A. (2019). Effects of a falls prevention exercise programme on health-related quality of life in older home care recipients: A randomised controlled trial. Age and Ageing,48(2), 213–219. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afy192.CrossRefPubMed

24.

von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gotzsche, P. C., Vandenbroucke, J. P., et al. (2007). The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. The Lancet,370(9596), 1453–1457. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61602-X.CrossRef

25.

Loge, J. H., & Kaasa, S. (1998). Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey: Normative data from the general Norwegian population. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health,26(4), 250–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/14034948980260040401.CrossRef

26.

Walters, S. J., & Brazier, J. E. (2005). Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Quality of Life Research,14(6), 1523–1532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-004-7713-0.CrossRefPubMed

27.

The EuroQol Group. (1990). EuroQol - a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy,16(3), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9.CrossRef

28.

Brazier, J. E., & Roberts, J. (2004). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Medical Care,42, 851–859.CrossRef

29.

Berg, K. O., Maki, B. E., Williams, J. I., Holliday, P. J., & Wood-Dauphinee, S. L. (1992). Clinical and laboratory measures of postural balance in an elderly population. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation,73(11), 1073–1080.PubMed

30.

Peters, D., Fritz, S., & Krotish, D. (2013). Assessing the reliability and validity of a shorter walk test compared with the 10-Meter Walk Test for measurements of gait speed in healthy, older adults. Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy,36(1), 24–30. https://doi.org/10.1519/JPT.0b013e318248e20d.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Jones, C. J., Rikli, R. E., & Beam, W. C. (1999). A 30-s chair-stand test as a measure of lower body strength in community-residing older adults. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,70(2), 113–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1999.10608028.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Helbostad, J. L., Taraldsen, K., Granbo, R., Yardley, L., Todd, C. J., & Sletvold, O. (2010). Validation of the falls efficacy scale-international in fall-prone older persons. Age and Ageing,39(2), 259. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afp224.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Marques-Vieira, C. M. A., Sousa, L. M. M., Severino, S., Sousa, L., & Caldeira, S. (2016). Cross-cultural validation of the falls efficacy scale international in elderly: Systematic literature review. Journal of Clinical Gerontology and Geriatrics,7(3), 72–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcgg.2015.12.002.CrossRef

34.

Tombaugh, T. N., & McIntyre, N. J. (1992). The mini-mental state examination: A comprehensive review. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society,40(9), 922–935. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1992.tb01992.x.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2013). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. London: Routledge.CrossRef

36.

Greene, W. H. (2012). Econometric analysis. Boston: Pearson.

37.

Karimi, M., & Brazier, J. (2016). Health, health-related quality of life, and quality of life: What is the difference? Pharmacoeconomics,34(7), 645–649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-016-0389-9.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Grund, S., Breitinger, E., Fricke, S., Alpers, G. W., Hundsdörfer, W., & Schäfer, H.-G. (2017). Health-related quality of life measurement inpatient geriatric rehabilitation: A comparison of the feasibility and suitability between the SF-36 and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. Journal of Gerontology & Geriatric Research,6(6), 458. https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-7182.1000458.CrossRef

39.

Sørensen, J., Davidsen, M., Gudex, C., Pedersen, K. M., & Brønnum-Hansen, H. (2009). Danish EQ-5D population norms. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health,37(5), 467–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494809105286.CrossRefPubMed

40.

van den Berg, B. (2012). Sf-6d population norms. Health Economics,21(12), 1508–1512. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1823.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Christiansen, T., Lauridsen, J. T., Kifmann, M., Lyttkens, C. H., Ólafsdóttir, T., & Valtonen, H. (2018). Healthcare, health and inequality in health in the Nordic countries. Nordic Journal of Health Economics,6(2), 10. https://doi.org/10.5617/njhe.5955.CrossRef

42.

Leegaard, M., Utne, I., Halvorsrud, L., Valeberg, B. T., Torbjørnsen, A., Bjørnnes, A. K., et al. (2018). A review of self-rated generic quality of life instruments used among older patients receiving home care nursing. Health and Social Care in the Community,26(3), e321–e328. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.12447.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Hickey, A., Barker, M., McGee, H., & O’boyle, C. (2005). Measuring health-related quality of life in older patient populations: A review of current approaches. Pharmacoeconomics,23(10), 971–993. https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200523100-00002.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Brazier, J. E., Walters, S. J., Nicholl, J., & Kohler, B. (1996). Using the SF-36 and Euroqol on an elderly population. Quality of Life Research,5(2), 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00434741.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Evaluating a falls prevention intervention in older home care recipients: a comparison of SF-6D and EQ-5D
verfasst von: Maria Bjerk
Therese Brovold
Jennifer C. Davis
Astrid Bergland
Publikationsdatum: 30.07.2019
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research / Ausgabe 12/2019
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-019-02258-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2019

Factors associated with quality of life in systemic sclerosis: a cross-sectional study

Feasibility and acceptability of intensive longitudinal data collection of activity and patient-reported outcomes during chemotherapy for breast cancer

Development of a mental health recovery module for the WHOQOL

Positive associations of optimism–pessimism orientation with pro-environmental behavior and subjective well-being: a longitudinal study on quality of life and everyday behavior

A hybrid modelling approach for eliciting health state preferences: the Portuguese EQ-5D-5L value set

Effect of tardive dyskinesia on quality of life in patients with bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, and schizophrenia