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
The European Journal of Health Economics
Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics 2/2015

Open Access 01-03-2015 | Original Paper

Examining the impact of 11 long-standing health conditions on health-related quality of life using the EQ-5D in a general population sample

Authors: Mengjun Wu, John E. Brazier, Benjamin Kearns, Clare Relton, Christine Smith, Cindy L. Cooper

Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics | Issue 2/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures have been increasingly used in economic evaluations for policy guidance. We investigate the impact of 11 self-reported long-standing health conditions on HRQoL using the EQ-5D in a UK sample.

Methods

We used data from 13,955 patients in the South Yorkshire Cohort study collected between 2010 and 2012 containing the EQ-5D, a preference-based measure. Ordinary least squares (OLS), Tobit and two-part regression analyses were undertaken to estimate the impact of 11 long-standing health conditions on HRQoL at the individual level.

Results

The results varied significantly with the regression models employed. In the OLS and Tobit models, pain had the largest negative impact on HRQoL, followed by depression, osteoarthritis and anxiety/nerves, after controlling for all other conditions and sociodemographic characteristics. The magnitude of coefficients was higher in the Tobit model than in the OLS model. In the two-part model, these four long-standing health conditions were statistically significant, but the magnitude of coefficients decreased significantly compared to that in the OLS and Tobit models and was ranked from pain followed by depression, anxiety/nerves and osteoarthritis.

Conclusions

Pain, depression, osteoarthritis and anxiety/nerves are associated with the greatest losses of HRQoL in the UK population. The estimates presented in this article should be used to inform economic evaluations when assessing health care interventions, though improvements can be made in terms of diagnostic information and obtaining longitudinal data.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Gold, M.R., Siegel, J.E., Russell, L.B., Weinstein, M.C. (eds.): Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford University Press, New York (1996)
2.
Cooper, J.K., Kohlmann, T., Michael, J.A., Haffer, S.C., Stevic, A.: Health outcomes. New quality measure for medicare. Int. J. Qual. Health Care 13, 9–16 (2001)CrossRefPubMed
3.
Murray, C.J.L., Lopez, A.D., Mathers, C.D., Stein, C.: The global burden of disease 2000 project: aims, methods and data sources. Global programme on evidence for health policy discussion paper 36, Word Health Organisation (2001)
4.
Gold, M.R., Muennig, P.: Measure-dependent variation in burden of diseases estimates: implications for policy. Med. Care 40, 260–266 (2002)CrossRefPubMed
5.
Williams, A.: The role of the EuroQol instrument in QALY calculations, discussion paper 130, Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York (1995)
6.
Dolan, P., Gudex, C., Kind, P., Williams, A.: The time-trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Econ. 5, 141–154 (1996)CrossRefPubMed
7.
8.
Spilker, B., Revicki, D.A.: Taxonomy of quality of life. In: Spilker, B. (ed.) Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials, 2nd edn, pp. 25–32. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia (1996)
9.
Bowling, A.: The effects of illness on quality of life: findings from a survey of households in Great Britain. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 50, 149–155 (1996)CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
10.
Tengs, T.O., Wallace, A.: One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. Med. Care 38, 583–637 (2000)CrossRefPubMed
11.
Saarni, S.I., Harkanen, T., Sintonen, H., Suvisaari, H., Koskinen, S., Aromaa, A., Lonnqvist, J.: The impact of 29 chronic conditions on health-related quality of life: a general population survey in Finland using 15D and EQ-5D. Qual. Life Res. 15, 1403–1414 (2006)CrossRefPubMed
12.
Lubetkin, E.I., Jia, H., Franks, P., Gold, M.R.: Relationships among sociodemographic factors, chronic conditions, and health-related quality of life: examining the EQ-5D in the US general population. Qual. Life Res. 14, 2187–2196 (2005)CrossRefPubMed
13.
Burstrom, K., Johannesson, M., Diderichsen, F.: Swedish population health-related quality of life results using the EQ-5D. Qual. Life Res. 10, 621–635 (2001)CrossRefPubMed
14.
Ara, R., Brazier, J.E.: Populating an economic model with health state utility values: moving toward better practice. Value in Health. 13, 509–518 (2010)CrossRefPubMed
15.
Relton, C., Bissell, P., Smith, C., Blackburn, J., Cooper, C., Nicholl, J., Tod, A., Copeland, R., Loban, A., Chater, T., Thomas, K., Young, T., Weir, C., Harrison, G., Millbourn, A., Manners, R.: South Yorkshire Cohort: a ‘cohort trials facility’ study of health and weight—protocol for the recruitment phase. BMC Public Health. 11, 640–648 (2011)CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
16.
Lavelle, K., Todd, C., Campbell, M.: Do postage stamps versus prepaid envelopes increase response rates to patient mail surveys: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Health Serv. Res. 8, 113–117 (2008)CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
17.
18.
Austin, P.C., Escobar, M., Kopec, J.A.: The use of the Tobit model for analysing measures of health status. Qual. Life Res. 9, 901–910 (2000)CrossRefPubMed
19.
Austin, P.C.: A comparison of methods for analyzing health-related quality-of-life measures. Value in Health. 5, 329–337 (2002)CrossRefPubMed
20.
Austin, P.C.: Bayesian extensions of the Tobit model for analysing measures of health status. Med. Decis. Mak. 22, 152–162 (2002)CrossRef
21.
Clarke, P., Gray, A., Holman, R.: Estimating utility values for health states of type 2 diabetic patients using the EQ-5D (UKPDS 62). Med. Decis. Mak. 22, 340–349 (2002)CrossRef
22.
23.
24.
Petrou, S., Hockley, C.: An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population. Health Econ. 14, 1169–1189 (2005)CrossRefPubMed
25.
Fryback, D.G., Dasbach, E.J., Klein, R., Klein, B.E., Dorn, N., Peterson, K., Martin, P.A.: The beaver dam health outcomes study: initial catelog of health-state quality of factors. Med. Decis. Mak 13, 89–102 (1993)CrossRef
26.
Johnson, J.A., Coons, S.J.: Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 in an adult US sample. Qual. Life Res. 7, 155–166 (1998)CrossRefPubMed
27.
Mittmann, N., Trakas, K., Risebrough, N., Liu, B.A.: Utility scores for chronic conditions in a community-dwelling population. Pharmacoeconomics. 15, 369–376 (1999)CrossRefPubMed
28.
Johnson, J.A., Pickard, A.S.: Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 health surveys in a general population survey in Alberta. Can. Med. Care 38, 115–121 (2000)CrossRef
29.
Burstrom, K., Johannesson, M., Diderichsen, F.: Health-related quality of life by disease and socio-economic group in the general population in Sweden. Health Policy 55, 51–69 (2001)CrossRefPubMed
30.
Manuel, D.G., Schultz, S.E., Kopec, J.A.: Measuring the health burden of chronic disease and injury using health adjusted life expectancy and the Health Utilities Index. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 56, 843–850 (2002)CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
31.
Schultz, S.E., Kopec, J.A.: Impact of chronic conditions. Health Rep. 14, 41–53 (2003)PubMed
32.
Alva, M., Gray, A., Mihaylova, B., Clarke, P.: The effect of diabetes complications on health-related quality of life: the importance of longitudinal data to address patient heterogeneity. Health Econ. (2013). doi:10.​1002/​hec.​2930 PubMed
33.
Bourdel-Marchasson, I., Druet, C., Helmer, C., Eschwege, E., Lecomte, P., Le-Goff, M., Sinclair, A.J., Fagot-Campagna, A.: Correlated of health-related quality of life in French people with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. 101, 226–235 (2013)CrossRefPubMed
34.
McCoy, R.G., Van Houten, H.K., Ziegenfuss, J.Y., Shah, N.D., Wermers, R.A., Smith, S.A.: Self-report of hypoglycemia and health-related quality of life in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Endocr. Pract. 19, 792–799 (2013)CrossRefPubMed
35.
Lukacs, A., Varga, B., Kiss-Toth, E., Soos, A., Barkai, L.: Factors influencing the diabetes-specific health-related quality of life in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus. J. Child Health Care (2013). doi:10.​1177/​1367493513486964​ PubMed
36.
Froisland, D.H., Graue, M., Markestad, T., Skrivarhaug, T., Wentzel-Larsen, T., Dahl-Jorgensen, K.: Health-related quality of life among Norwegian children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes on intensive insulin treatment: a population-based study. Acta Paediatr. 102, 889–895 (2013)CrossRefPubMed
37.
Marrero, D., Pan, Q., Barrett-Connor, E., de Groot, M., Zhang, P., Percy, C., Florez, H., Ackermann, R., Montez, M., Rubin, R.R.: Impact of diagnosis of diabetes on health-related quality of life among high risk individuals: the Diabetes Prevention Program outcomes study. Qual. Life Res. (2013). doi:10.​1007/​s11136-013-0436-3 PubMedCentralPubMed
38.
Sparring, V., Nystrom, L., Wahlstrom, R., Jonsson, P.M., Ostman, J., Burstrom, K.: Diabetes duration and health-related quality of life in individuals with onset of diabetes in the age group 15–34 years—a Swedish population-based study using EQ-5D. BMC Public Health. 13, 377–387 (2013)CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
39.
Kind, P., Hardman, G., Macran, S.: UK population norms for EQ-5D. Centre for Health Economics Discussion paper 172, University of York, York (1999)
40.
Macran, S., Weatherly, H., Kind, P.: Measuring population health: a comparison of three generic health status measures. Med. Care 41, 218–231 (2003)PubMed
41.
Sullivan, P.W., Ghushchyan, V.: Mapping the EQ-5D index from the SF-12: uS general population preferences in a nationally representative sample. Med. Decis. Mak. 26, 401–409 (2006)CrossRef
42.
Wu, S.C., Li, C.Y., Ke, D.S.: The agreement between self-reporting and clinical diagnosis for selected medical conditions among the elderly in Taiwan. Public Health. 114, 137–142 (2000)CrossRefPubMed
43.
Brazier, J.E., Jones, N., Kind, P.: Testing the validity of the Euroqol and comparing it with the SF-36 health survey questionnaire. Qual. Life Res. 2, 169–180 (1993)CrossRefPubMed
44.
Wooldridge, J.M.: Corner solution outcomes and censored regression models. In: Wooldridge, J.M. (ed.) Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data, pp. 517–550. The MIT press, Cambridge (2002)
Metadata
Title
Examining the impact of 11 long-standing health conditions on health-related quality of life using the EQ-5D in a general population sample
Authors
Mengjun Wu
John E. Brazier
Benjamin Kearns
Clare Relton
Christine Smith
Cindy L. Cooper
Publication date
01-03-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
The European Journal of Health Economics / Issue 2/2015
Print ISSN: 1618-7598
Electronic ISSN: 1618-7601
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-013-0559-z

Other articles of this Issue 2/2015

The European Journal of Health Economics 2/2015 Go to the issue

Commentary

Commentary to: costs of diabetes and its complications in Poland

Original Paper

Output correlations in probabilistic models with multiple alternatives

Reply

Reply to commentary on costs of diabetes and its complications in Poland

Original Paper

The influence of obesity and overweight on medical costs: a panel data perspective

Original Paper

Improving the prediction model used in risk equalization: cost and diagnostic information from multiple prior years

Original Paper

Impact of small study bias on cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and value of information analyses