Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 1/2014

Open Access 01-03-2014 | Original Research Article

Validity and Reliability of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL)-8D Multi-Attribute Utility Instrument

Authors: Jeff Richardson, Angelo Iezzi, Munir A. Khan, Aimee Maxwell

Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

The purpose of this paper was to report tests of the validity and reliability of a new instrument, the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL)-8D, which was constructed to improve the evaluation of health services that have an impact upon the psychosocial aspects of the quality of life.

Methods

Australian and US data from a large multi-instrument comparison survey were used to conduct tests of convergent, predictive and content validity using as comparators five other multi-attribute utility (MAU) instruments—the EQ-5D, SF-6D, Health Utilities Index (HUI) 3, 15D and the Quality of Well-Being (QWB)—as well as four non-utility instruments—the SF-36 and three measures of subjective well-being (SWB). A separate three part Australian survey was used to assess test–retest reliability.

Results

Results indicate that AQoL-8D correlates more highly with both the SWB instruments and the psychosocial dimensions of the SF-36, and that it is similar to the other MAU instruments in terms of its convergent and predictive validity. The second Australian survey demonstrated high test–retest reliability.

Conclusions

The results indicate that the AQoL-8D is a reliable and valid instrument which offers an alternative to the MAU instruments presently used in economic evaluation studies, and one which is particularly suitable when psychosocial elements of health are of importance.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Day NA. A comparison of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) with four other generic utility instruments. Ann Med. 2001;33:358–70.PubMedCrossRef Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Day NA. A comparison of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) with four other generic utility instruments. Ann Med. 2001;33:358–70.PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Fryback DG, Palta M, Cherepanov D, Bolt D, Kim J. Comparison of 5 health related quality of life indexes using item response theory analysis. Med Decis Mak. 2010;30(1):5–15.CrossRef Fryback DG, Palta M, Cherepanov D, Bolt D, Kim J. Comparison of 5 health related quality of life indexes using item response theory analysis. Med Decis Mak. 2010;30(1):5–15.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Richardson J, McKie J, Bariola E. Multi attribute utility instruments and their use. In: Culyer AJ, editor. Online encyclopaedia of health economics. San Diego: Elsevier Science; 2014. Richardson J, McKie J, Bariola E. Multi attribute utility instruments and their use. In: Culyer AJ, editor. Online encyclopaedia of health economics. San Diego: Elsevier Science; 2014.
4.
go back to reference Drummond M, Sculpher M, Torrance G, O’Brien B, Stoddart G. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programs. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005. Drummond M, Sculpher M, Torrance G, O’Brien B, Stoddart G. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programs. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005.
5.
go back to reference Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Salomon J, Tsuchiya A. Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007. Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Salomon J, Tsuchiya A. Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.
6.
go back to reference Streiner D, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2003. Streiner D, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2003.
7.
go back to reference Loevinger J. Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychol Rep. 1957;3:634–94.CrossRef Loevinger J. Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychol Rep. 1957;3:634–94.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Patrick D, Erickson P. Health status and health policy: quality of life in health care evaluation and resource allocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1993. Patrick D, Erickson P. Health status and health policy: quality of life in health care evaluation and resource allocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1993.
9.
go back to reference McDowell I. Measuring health: a guide to rating scales and questionnaires. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006.CrossRef McDowell I. Measuring health: a guide to rating scales and questionnaires. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference McDonald RP. Test theory: a unified treatment. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers; 1999. McDonald RP. Test theory: a unified treatment. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers; 1999.
11.
go back to reference McDonald RP. Semiconfirmatory factor analysis: the example of anxiety and depression. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J. 2005;12(1):163–72.CrossRef McDonald RP. Semiconfirmatory factor analysis: the example of anxiety and depression. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J. 2005;12(1):163–72.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Osborne R. The Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument: a psychometric measure of health related quality of life. Qual Life Res. 1999;8:209–24.PubMedCrossRef Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Osborne R. The Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument: a psychometric measure of health related quality of life. Qual Life Res. 1999;8:209–24.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Richardson J, Day NA, Peacock S, Iezzi A. Measurement of the quality of life for economic evaluation and the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) Mark 2 Instrument. Aust Econ Rev. 2004;37(1):62–88.CrossRef Richardson J, Day NA, Peacock S, Iezzi A. Measurement of the quality of life for economic evaluation and the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) Mark 2 Instrument. Aust Econ Rev. 2004;37(1):62–88.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Richardson J, Elsworth G, Iezzi A, Khan MA, Mihalopoulos C, Schweitzer I, et al. Increasing the sensitivity of the AQoL inventory for evaluation of interventions affecting mental health. Research paper 61. Melbourne: Centre for Health Economics, Monash University; 2011. Richardson J, Elsworth G, Iezzi A, Khan MA, Mihalopoulos C, Schweitzer I, et al. Increasing the sensitivity of the AQoL inventory for evaluation of interventions affecting mental health. Research paper 61. Melbourne: Centre for Health Economics, Monash University; 2011.
15.
go back to reference Richardson J, Sinha K, Iezzi A, Khan M. Modelling the utility of health states with the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) 8D instrument: overview and utility scoring algorithm. Research paper 63. Melbourne: Centre for Health Economics, Monash University; 2011. Richardson J, Sinha K, Iezzi A, Khan M. Modelling the utility of health states with the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) 8D instrument: overview and utility scoring algorithm. Research paper 63. Melbourne: Centre for Health Economics, Monash University; 2011.
16.
go back to reference Von Winterfeldt D, Edwards W. Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1986. Von Winterfeldt D, Edwards W. Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1986.
17.
go back to reference Simmons CA, Lehmann P. Tools for strengths-based assessment and evaluation. New York: Springer; 2013. Simmons CA, Lehmann P. Tools for strengths-based assessment and evaluation. New York: Springer; 2013.
19.
go back to reference Diener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ, Griffin S. The satisfaction with life scale. J Personal Assess. 1985;49(1):71–5.CrossRef Diener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ, Griffin S. The satisfaction with life scale. J Personal Assess. 1985;49(1):71–5.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Tofallis C. Model fitting for multiple variables by minimising the geometric mean deviation. In: Van Huffel S, Lemmerling P, editors. Total least squares and errors-in-variables modeling: algorithms, analysis and applications. Kluwer Academic; 2002. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1077322. Tofallis C. Model fitting for multiple variables by minimising the geometric mean deviation. In: Van Huffel S, Lemmerling P, editors. Total least squares and errors-in-variables modeling: algorithms, analysis and applications. Kluwer Academic; 2002. http://​ssrn.​com/​abstract=​1077322.
Metadata
Title
Validity and Reliability of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL)-8D Multi-Attribute Utility Instrument
Authors
Jeff Richardson
Angelo Iezzi
Munir A. Khan
Aimee Maxwell
Publication date
01-03-2014
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Issue 1/2014
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Electronic ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-013-0036-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 1/2014 Go to the issue