Top

Quality of Life Research

Published in:

Open Access 01-10-2021

Validity, responsiveness and minimal important change of the EQ-5D-5L in patients after rotator cuff repair, shoulder arthroplasty or thumb carpometacarpal arthroplasty

Authors: Miriam Marks, Cécile Grobet, Laurent Audigé

Published in: Quality of Life Research | Issue 10/2021

Abstract

Purpose

The aim was to investigate the measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L utility index in patients after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR), total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) or thumb carpometacarpal (CMC I) arthroplasty.

Methods

In this prospective study, all patients completed the EQ-5D-5L before surgery and 6 months and 1 year after surgery. In addition, RCR patients completed the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), TSA patients completed the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) and CMC I patients completed the brief Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (brief MHQ) at each designated time point. Construct validity (Pearson’s correlation coefficient, r), responsiveness (effect size), minimal important difference (MID), minimal important change (MIC), and floor and ceiling effects of the EQ-5D-5L were determined. To test discriminative ability, EQ-5D-5L utility indices of patients who were in a patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) or not at follow-up were compared using the Mann–Whitney U test.

Results

We included 153 RCR, 150 TSA, and 151 CMC I patients. The EQ-5D-5L utility index correlated with the OSS (r = 0.73), SPADI (r = − 0.65) and brief MHQ (r = 0.61). The effect sizes were 1.3 (RCR and CMC I group) and 1.1 (TSA). The MID and MIC ranged from 0.027 to 0.209. Ceiling effects were found. The EQ-5D-5L utility index differed significantly between patients being in a PASS versus patients who were not in a PASS.

Conclusion

The EQ-5D-5L utility index shows good construct validity, responsiveness and discriminative ability in patients after arthroscopic RCR, TSA and CMC I arthroplasty and is suitable to quantify quality of life.

Clinical trial registration: This auxiliary analysis is part of a primary study that was originally registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01954433) on October 1, 2013.

Available only for authorised users

Narvani, A. A., Imam, M. A., Godeneche, A., Calvo, E., Corbett, S., Wallace, A. L., et al. (2020). Degenerative rotator cuff tear, repair or not repair? A review of current evidence. Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 102(4), 248–255PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Carter, M. J., Mikuls, T. R., Nayak, S., Fehringer, E. V., & Michaud, K. (2012). Impact of total shoulder arthroplasty on generic and shoulder-specific health-related quality-of-life measures: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume, 94(17), e127CrossRef

Wajon, A., Vinycomb, T., Carr, E., Edmunds, I., & Ada, L. (2015). Surgery for thumb (trapeziometacarpal joint) osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2(2), CD004631

Olerud, P., Tidermark, J., Ponzer, S., Ahrengart, L., & Bergström, G. (2011). Responsiveness of the EQ-5D in patients with proximal humeral fractures. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 20(8), 1200–1206PubMedCrossRef

Slobogean, G. P., Noonan, V. K., & O’Brien, P. J. (2010). The reliability and validity of the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, EuroQol-5D, Health Utilities Index, and Short Form-6D outcome instruments in patients with proximal humeral fractures. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 19(3), 342–348PubMedCrossRef

Marti, C., Hensler, S., Herren, D. B., Niedermann, K., & Marks, M. (2016). Measurement properties of the EuroQoL EQ-5D-5L to assess quality of life in patients undergoing carpal tunnel release. Journal of Hand Surgery 41(9), 957–962PubMedCrossRef

Grobet, C., Marks, M., Tecklenburg, L., & Audigé, L. (2018). Application and measurement properties of EQ-5D to measure quality of life in patients with upper extremity orthopaedic disorders: A systematic literature review. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 138(7), 953–961PubMedCrossRef

Jain, S. S., DeFroda, S. F., Paxton, E. S., & Green, A. (2020). Patient-reported outcome measures and health-related quality-of-life scores of patients undergoing anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume, 102(13), 1186–1193CrossRef

Evans, J., Dattani, R., Ramasamy, V., & Patel, V. (2018). Responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L in elective shoulder surgery: Does it adequately represent patient experience? Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery (Hong Kong), 26(2), 2309499018774922

10.

Hensler, S., Wehrli, M., Herren, D. B., & Marks, M. (2020). Measurement properties of the German Unite Rhumatologique des Affections de la Main (URAM) scale in patients treated for Dupuytren’s disease. Hand Surgery and Rehabilitations, 39(6), 568–574CrossRef

11.

Rundgren, J., Enocson, A., Mellstrand Navarro, C., & Bergstrom, G. (2018). Responsiveness of EQ-5D in patients with a distal radius fracture. Hand (N Y), 13(5), 572–580CrossRef

12.

Grobet, C., Audigé, L., Eichler, K., Meier, F., Brunner, B., Wieser, S., et al. (2020). Cost-utility analysis of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: A prospective health economic study using real-world data. Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2(3), e193–e205CrossRef

13.

Grobet, C. E., Glanzmann, M. C., Eichler, K., Rickenbacher, D., Meier, F., Brunner, B., & Audigé, L. (2021) Cost-utility analysis of total shoulder arthroplasty: A prospective health economic study using real-world data. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery

14.

von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gotzsche, P. C., & Vandenbroucke, J. P. (2007). The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 85(11), 867–872CrossRef

15.

Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., Janssen, M., Kind, P., Parkin, D., et al. (2011). Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Quality of Life Research, 20(10), 1727–1736PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

16.

Ludwig, K., Graf von der Schulenburg, J. M., & Greiner, W. (2018). German value set for the EQ-5D-5L. PharmacoEconomics, 36(6), 663–674PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

17.

Dawson, J., Rogers, K., Fitzpatrick, R., & Carr, A. (2009). The Oxford shoulder score revisited. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 129(1), 119–123PubMedCrossRef

18.

Roach, K. E., Budiman-Mak, E., Songsiridej, N., & Lertratanakul, Y. (1991). Development of a shoulder pain and disability index. Arthritis Care and Research, 4(4), 143–149PubMedCrossRef

19.

Waljee, J. F., Kim, H. M., Burns, P. B., & Chung, K. C. (2011). Development of a brief, 12-item version of the Michigan Hand Questionnaire. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 128(1), 208–220PubMedCrossRef

20.

Beaton, D. E., Wright, J. G., Katz, J. N., & Group, U. E. C. (2005). Development of the QuickDASH: Comparison of three item-reduction approaches. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 87(5), 1038–1046

21.

de Vet, H. C. W., Terwee, C. B., Mokkink, L. B., & Knol, D. L. (2011). Measurement in medicine: A practical guide. Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

22.

Jaeschke, R., Singer, J., & Guyatt, G. H. (1989). Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Controlled Clinical Trials, 10(4), 407–415PubMedCrossRef

23.

Marks, M., Hensler, S., Wehrli, M., Schindele, S., & Herren, D. B. (2019). Minimal important change and patient acceptable symptom state for patients after proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty. Journal of Hand Surgery, 44(2), 175–180PubMedCrossRef

24.

Constant, C. R., Gerber, C., Emery, R. J., Sojbjerg, J. O., Gohlke, F., & Boileau, P. (2008). A review of the Constant score: Modifications and guidelines for its use. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 17(2), 355–361PubMedCrossRef

25.

Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Knol, D. L., Stratford, P. W., Alonso, J., Patrick, D. L., et al. (2010). The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: A clarification of its content. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10, 22PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

26.

Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Stratford, P. W., Knol, D. L., et al. (2010). The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(7), 737–745PubMedCrossRef

27.

Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159PubMedCrossRef

28.

de Vet, H. C., Beckerman, H., Terwee, C. B., Terluin, B., & Bouter, L. M. (2006). Definition of clinical differences. Journal of Rheumatology, 33(2), 434

29.

Copay, A. G., Subach, B. R., Glassman, S. D., Polly, D. W., Jr., & Schuler, T. C. (2007). Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: A review of concepts and methods. The Spine Journal, 7(5), 541–546PubMedCrossRef

30.

Norman, G. R., Sloan, J. A., & Wyrwich, K. W. (2003). Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: The remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Medical Care, 41(5), 582–592PubMed

31.

Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34–42CrossRef

32.

Tubach, F., Dougados, M., Falissard, B., Baron, G., Logeart, I., & Ravaud, P. (2006). Feeling good rather than feeling better matters more to patients. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 55(4), 526–530PubMedCrossRef

33.

Christie, A., Dagfinrud, H., Garratt, A. M., Ringen Osnes, H., & Hagen, K. B. (2011). Identification of shoulder-specific patient acceptable symptom state in patients with rheumatic diseases undergoing shoulder surgery. Journal of Hand Therapy, 24(1), 53–60PubMedCrossRef

34.

Marks, M., Grobet, C., Audigé, L., & Herren, D. B. (2019). Clinical thresholds of symptoms for deciding on surgery for trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis. Journal of Hand Surgery, 44(9), 937–945PubMedCrossRef

35.

Zhaeentan, S., Legeby, M., Ahlstrom, S., Stark, A., & Salomonsson, B. (2016). A validation of the Swedish version of the WORC index in the assessment of patients treated by surgery for subacromial disease including rotator cuff syndrome. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 17, 165PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

36.

Haragus, H., Prejbeanu, R., Patrascu, J., Faur, C., Roman, M., Melinte, R., et al. (2018). Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Romanian Oxford Shoulder Score. Medicine (Baltimore), 97(23), e10926CrossRef

37.

Dabija, D. I., & Jain, N. B. (2019). Minimal clinically important difference of shoulder outcome measures and diagnoses: A systematic review. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 98(8), 671–676PubMedCrossRef

38.

Atthakomol, P., Manosroi, W., Sanguanrungsirikul, S., Punoppamas, S., Benjachaya, S., Tongprasert, S., et al. (2020). A Thai version of the Michigan hand questionnaire (Thai MHQ): An investigation of the psychometric properties. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 18(1), 313PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

39.

Grochtdreis, T., Dams, J., Konig, H. H., & Konnopka, A. (2019). 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. The European Journal of Health Economics, 20(6), 933–944PubMedCrossRef

40.

Henry, E. B., Barry, L. E., Hobbins, A. P., McClure, N. S., & O’Neill, C. (2020). Estimation of an instrument-defined minimally important difference in EQ-5D-5L Index scores based on scoring algorithms derived using the EQ-VT version 2 valuation protocols. Value in Health, 23(7), 936–944PubMedCrossRef

41.

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), 1523–1532PubMedCrossRef

42.

de Vet, H. C., Terwee, C. B., Ostelo, R. W., Beckerman, H., Knol, D. L., & Bouter, L. M. (2006). Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: Distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 4, 54PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

43.

Crosby, R. D., Kolotkin, R. L., & Williams, G. R. (2003). Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56(5), 395–407PubMedCrossRef

44.

de Vet, H. C., Terluin, B., Knol, D. L., Roorda, L. D., Mokkink, L. B., Ostelo, R. W., et al. (2010). Three ways to quantify uncertainty in individually applied “minimally important change” values. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(1), 37–45PubMedCrossRef

Title: Validity, responsiveness and minimal important change of the EQ-5D-5L in patients after rotator cuff repair, shoulder arthroplasty or thumb carpometacarpal arthroplasty
Authors: Miriam Marks
Cécile Grobet
Laurent Audigé
Publication date: 01-10-2021
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: Quality of Life Research / Issue 10/2021
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02849-7

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Validity, responsiveness and minimal important change of the EQ-5D-5L in patients after rotator cuff repair, shoulder arthroplasty or thumb carpometacarpal arthroplasty

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2021

Support for the higher-order factor structure of the WHODAS 2.0 self-report version in a Dutch outpatient psychiatric setting

Health-related quality of life in adults with tetralogy of Fallot repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

An item analysis according to the Rasch model of the German 12-item WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0)

Mapping the Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer to the SF-6D

Between-group minimally important change versus individual treatment responders

Assessing hospitalized patients’ quality of life from external indices: the perspectives of lay people and health professionals