Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Public Health
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2024

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Research

EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L population norms for Thailand

Authors: Krittaphas Kangwanrattanakul, Christian U. Krägeloh

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The previous Thai norm-based scores for the EQ-5D-5L were established with Thai general population samples aged 20–70 years in 2019. Nevertheless, these values need to be updated after the COVID-19 pandemic because of its effects on both physical and mental health. This study therefore aimed to establish population norms of the Thai EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L and EQ-VAS scores as well as to estimate disutility values associated with self-reported main diseases.

Methods

Individual face-to-face interviews were conducted with 2000 adult (age ≥ 18 years) members of the general Thai population to estimate norm-based scores. Each participant completed the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L as well as questions related to their sociodemographic factors and self-reported main diseases. Responses to the two instruments were converted to health utility (HU) scores on the basis of available value sets. Descriptive statistics were used to report the norm-based scores stratified by age and sex categories. Response redistribution determining the response consistency between EQ-5D versions was investigated. The HU score agreement from those two instruments was investigated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Tobit regression models were employed to investigate the relationships between sociodemographic factors and HU and EQ-VAS scores. Moreover, it was used to estimate the disutility values associated with self-reported main diseases.

Results

The means (percentage of ceiling effects) of EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and EQ-VAS scores were 0.845 (57.80%), 0.923 (49.05%), and 79.83 (3.20%), respectively. The average percentage of inconsistent response was 1.09%. A good agreement level was found between both EQ-5D versions with the ICCs of 0.789 (95% CI: 0.558–0.878). Female, older, and unemployed participants and those with BMI ≥ 30 reported lower EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L than their counterparts. Bone/Joint disorder and stroke contributed to the largest disutility value for those two instruments.

Conclusions

The Thai norm-based scores from those two instruments were diminished when advancing age and among female, unemployed, and obese (BMI ≥ 30) participants. It is expected to provide information to policy makers to better allocate health care resources to those with diminished norm-based scores.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Gusi N, Olivares PR, Rajendram R. The EQ-5D health-related quality of Life Questionnaire. In: Preedy VR, Watson RR, editors. Handbook of Disease burdens and Quality of Life measures. New York, NY: Springer New York; 2010. pp. 87–99.CrossRef
2.
Feng YS, Kohlmann T, Janssen MF, Buchholz I. Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L: a systematic review of the literature. Qual Life Res. 2021;30(3):647–73.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Kangwanrattanakul K, Parmontree P. Psychometric properties comparison between EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L in the general Thai population. Qual Life Res. 2020;29(12):3407–17.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Yang F, Devlin N, Luo N. Cost-utility analysis using EQ-5D-5L data: does how the utilities are derived Matter? Value Health. 2019;22(1):45–9.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Raftery J, Young A, Stanton L, Milne R, Cook A, Turner D, et al. Clinical trial metadata: defining and extracting metadata on the design, conduct, results and costs of 125 randomised clinical trials funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme. Health Technol Assess. 2015;19(11):1–138.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
6.
7.
Shiroiwa T, Fukuda T, Ikeda S, Igarashi A, Noto S, Saito S, et al. Japanese population norms for preference-based measures: EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and SF-6D. Qual Life Res. 2016;25(3):707–19.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Konig HH, Bernert S, Angermeyer MC, Matschinger H, Martinez M, Vilagut G, et al. Comparison of population health status in six European countries: results of a representative survey using the EQ-5D questionnaire. Med Care. 2009;47(2):255–61.PubMedCrossRef
9.
McCaffrey N, Kaambwa B, Currow DC, Ratcliffe J. Health-related quality of life measured using the EQ-5D-5L: South Australian population norms. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016;14(1):133.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
10.
Bailey H, Janssen MF, La Foucade A, Boodraj G, Wharton M, Castillo P. EQ-5D self-reported health in Barbados and Jamaica with EQ-5D-5L population norms for the English-speaking Caribbean. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2021;19(1):97.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
11.
Van Wilder L, Charafeddine R, Beutels P, Bruyndonckx R, Cleemput I, Demarest S, et al. Belgian population norms for the EQ-5D-5L, 2018. Qual Life Res. 2022;31(2):527–37.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Encheva M, Djambazov S, Vekov T, Golicki D. EQ-5D-5L Bulgarian population norms. Eur J Health Econ. 2020;21(8):1169–78.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Poder TG, Carrier N, Kouakou CRC. Quebec Health-Related Quality-of-life Population norms using the EQ-5D-5L: decomposition by Sociodemographic Data and health problems. Value Health. 2020;23(2):251–9.PubMedCrossRef
14.
15.
Wong EL, Cheung AW, Wong AY, Xu RH, Ramos-Goñi JM, Rivero-Arias O. Normative Profile of Health-Related Quality of Life for Hong Kong General Population using preference-based instrument EQ-5D-5L. Value Health. 2019;22(8):916–24.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Bailey HH, Janssen MF, Varela RO, Moreno JA. EQ-5D-5L Population norms and Health Inequality in Colombia. Value Health Reg Issues. 2021;26:24–32.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Jensen MB, Jensen CE, Gudex C, Pedersen KM, Sørensen SS, Ehlers LH. Danish population health measured by the EQ-5D-5L. Scand J Public Health. 2021:14034948211058060.
18.
McNamara S, Schneider PP, Love-Koh J, Doran T, Gutacker N. Quality-adjusted life expectancy norms for the English Population. Value Health. 2023;26(2):163–9.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Gautier L, Azzi J, Saba G, Bonnelye G, de Pouvourville G. Population norms in France with EQ-5D-5L: health states, value indexes, and VAS. Eur J Health Econ. 2023;24(9):1517–30.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Grochtdreis T, Dams J, König HH, Konnopka A. Health-related quality of life measured with the EQ-5D-5L: estimation of normative index values based on a representative German population sample and value set. Eur J Health Econ. 2019;20(6):933–44.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Purba FD, Hunfeld JAM, Iskandarsyah A, Fitriana TS, Sadarjoen SS, Passchier J, et al. Quality of life of the Indonesian general population: test-retest reliability and population norms of the EQ-5D-5L and WHOQOL-BREF. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(5):e0197098.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Emrani Z, Akbari Sari A, Zeraati H, Olyaeemanesh A, Daroudi R. Health-related quality of life measured using the EQ-5D-5 L: population norms for the capital of Iran. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020;18(1):108.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
23.
Hobbins A, Barry L, Kelleher D, O’Neill C. The health of the residents of Ireland: Population norms for Ireland based on the EQ-5D-5L descriptive system - a cross sectional study. HRB Open Res. 2018;1:22.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
24.
Shiroiwa T, Noto S, Fukuda T. Japanese Population norms of EQ-5D-5L and Health Utilities Index Mark 3: disutility catalog by Disease and Symptom in Community settings. Value Health. 2021;24(8):1193–202.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Sullivan T, Turner RM, Derrett S, Hansen P. New Zealand Population norms for the EQ-5D-5L constructed from the personal value sets of participants in a National Survey. Value Health. 2021;24(9):1308–18.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Garratt AM, Hansen TM, Augestad LA, Rand K, Stavem K. Norwegian population norms for the EQ-5D-5L: results from a general population survey. Qual Life Res. 2022;31(2):517–26.PubMedCrossRef
27.
28.
Hołownia-Voloskova M, Tarbastaev A, Golicki D. Population norms of health-related quality of life in Moscow, Russia: the EQ-5D-5L-based survey. Qual Life Res. 2021;30(3):831–40.PubMedCrossRef
29.
30.
Hernandez G, Garin O, Pardo Y, Vilagut G, Pont À, Suárez M, et al. Validity of the EQ-5D-5L and reference norms for the Spanish population. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(9):2337–48.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Teni FS, Gerdtham UG, Leidl R, Henriksson M, Åström M, Sun S, et al. Inequality and heterogeneity in health-related quality of life: findings based on a large sample of cross-sectional EQ-5D-5L data from the Swedish general population. Qual Life Res. 2022;31(3):697–712.PubMedCrossRef
32.
33.
Jiang R, Janssen MFB, Pickard AS. US population norms for the EQ-5D-5L and comparison of norms from face-to-face and online samples. Qual Life Res. 2021;30(3):803–16.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Nguyen LH, Tran BX, Hoang Le QN, Tran TT, Latkin CA. Quality of life profile of general Vietnamese population using EQ-5D-5L. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017;15(1):199.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
35.
Thavorncharoensap M, Sakthong P. Health utility. In: Pannarunothai S, Pilasant S, Saengsri W, Kingkaew P, editors. The Guideline of Health Technology Assessment in Thailand. Nonthaburi: Health Systems Research Institute; 2019. pp. 77–94.
36.
Pattanaphesaj J, Thavorncharoensap M. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to EQ-5D-3L in the Thai diabetes patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015;13:14.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
37.
Sakthong P, Sonsa-Ardjit N, Sukarnjanaset P, Munpan W. Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in Thai patients with chronic diseases. Qual Life Res. 2015;24(12):3015–22.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Kangwanrattanakul K. A systematic review of health state utility values in Thai cancer patients. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2022;22(8):1171–86.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Pattanaphesaj J, Thavorncharoensap M, Ramos-Goni JM, Tongsiri S, Ingsrisawang L, Teerawattananon Y. The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Thailand. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2018;18(5):551–8.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Tongsiri S, Cairns J. Estimating population-based values for EQ-5D health states in Thailand. Value Health. 2011;14(8):1142–5.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Kangwanrattanakul K. Normative profile of the EQ-5D-5L dimensions, EQ-5D-5L index and EQ-VAS scores for the general Thai population. Qual Life Res. 2023;32(9):2489–502.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Gheasi M, Ishikawa N, Kourtit K, Nijkamp P. A meta-analysis of human health differences in urban and rural environments. Lett Spat Resource Sci. 2019;12(3):167–86.CrossRef
43.
Ishikawa H, Kato M, Kiuchi T. Declines in health literacy and health-related quality of life during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal study of the Japanese general population. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):2180.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
44.
Pieh C, Budimir S, Probst T. The effect of age, gender, income, work, and physical activity on mental health during coronavirus disease (COVID-19) lockdown in Austria. J Psychosom Res. 2020;136:110186.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
45.
Malik P, Patel K, Pinto C, Jaiswal R, Tirupathi R, Pillai S, et al. Post-acute COVID-19 syndrome (PCS) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL)-A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Virol. 2022;94(1):253–62.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Smith P, De Pauw R, Van Cauteren D, Demarest S, Drieskens S, Cornelissen L, et al. Post COVID-19 condition and health-related quality of life: a longitudinal cohort study in the Belgian adult population. BMC Public Health. 2023;23(1):1433.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
47.
Janssen MF, Birnie E, Haagsma JA, Bonsel GJ. Comparing the standard EQ-5D three-level system with a five-level version. Value Health. 2008;11(2):275–84.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Koo TK, Li MY. A Guideline of selecting and reporting Intraclass correlation coefficients for Reliability Research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155–63.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
Austin PC, Escobar M, Kopec JA. The use of the Tobit model for analyzing measures of health status. Qual Life Res. 2000;9(8):901–10.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Xie S, Wu J, Xie F. Population norms for SF-6Dv2 and EQ-5D-5L in China. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2022;20(4):573–85.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Law PCF, Too LS, Butterworth P, Witt K, Reavley N, Milner AJ. A systematic review on the effect of work-related stressors on mental health of young workers. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2020;93(5):611–22.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Buchholz I, Janssen MF, Kohlmann T, Feng YS. A systematic review of studies comparing the Measurement Properties of the three-level and five-level versions of the EQ-5D. PharmacoEconomics. 2018;36(6):645–61.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
53.
Katanyoo K, Thavorncharoensap M, Chaikledkaew U, Riewpaiboon A. A comparison of six approaches for measuring utility values among patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2022;22(1):107–17.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Perneger TV, Combescure C, Courvoisier DS. General population reference values for the French version of the EuroQol EQ-5D health utility instrument. Value Health. 2010;13(5):631–5.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Persson U, Olofsson S, Gu NY, Gong CL, Jiao X, Hay JW. Quality of Life in the Swedish General Population During COVID-19-Based on pre-and post-pandemic outbreak measurement. Nord J Health Econ. 2021 Sep 21;9(1):56–73.
56.
Ramos-Lima MJM, Brasileiro IC, Lima TL, Braga-Neto P. Quality of life after stroke: impact of clinical and sociodemographic factors. Clin (Sao Paulo). 2018;73:e418.CrossRef
57.
Metadata
Title
EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L population norms for Thailand
Authors
Krittaphas Kangwanrattanakul
Christian U. Krägeloh
Publication date
01-12-2024
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18391-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

BMC Public Health 1/2024 Go to the issue

Research

Associations between cardiovascular diseases and cancer mortality: insights from a retrospective cohort analysis of NHANES data

Research

Epidemiological characteristics of neuroendocrine neoplasms in Beijing: a population-based retrospective study

Research

Ideal cardiovascular health metrics have better identification of arthritis

Research

Acute and persistent symptoms of COVID-19 infection in school-aged children: a retrospective study from China

Research

Looking under the lamp-post: quantifying the performance of contact tracing in the United States during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

Research

Individual, family, and environmental correlates of fundamental motor skills among school-aged children: a cross-sectional study in China