Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-11-2009

The comparative responsiveness of the EQ-5D and SF-6D to change in patients with inflammatory arthritis

Authors: M. J. Harrison, L. M. Davies, N. J. Bansback, M. J. McCoy, S. M. M. Verstappen, K. Watson, D. P. M. Symmons, The British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register Control Centre Consortium, on behalf of the BSRBR

Published in: Quality of Life Research | Issue 9/2009

Abstract

Purpose

Comparative evidence regarding the responsiveness of the EQ-5D and SF-6D in arthritis patients is conflicting and insufficient across the range of disease severity. We examined the comparative responsiveness of the EQ-5D and SF-6D in cohorts of patients with early inflammatory disease through to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

Responsiveness was tested using the effect size (ES) and standardised response mean (SRM). Correlation of change in EQ-5D and SF-6D with disease specific measures was tested using Pearson correlations and the Steiger’s Z test. Treatment response and self-reported change were used as anchors of important change.

Results

The EQ-5D was more responsive to deterioration (ES ratio (EQ-5D/SF-6D): 1.6–3.0) and the SF-6D more responsive to improvement (ES ratio (SF-6D/EQ-5D): 1.1–1.8) in health. The SF-6D did not respond well to deterioration in patients with established severe RA (ES and SRM 0.08). The EQ-5D provided larger absolute mean change estimates but with greater variance compared to the SF-6D.

Conclusions

The comparative responsiveness of the EQ-5D and SF-6D differs according to the direction of change. The level of mean change of the EQ-5D relative to the SF-6D has implications for cost-effectiveness analysis. Use of the SF-6D in patients with severe progressive disease may be inappropriate.

Available only for authorised users

Drummond, M. F., Sculpher, M. J., Torrance, G. W., O’Brien, B. J., & Stoddart, G. L. (2005). Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. (2005). A guide to NICE. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence.

Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. (2007). Ontario guidelines for economic analysis of pharmaceutical products. Internet 2004 August [cited 2007 Jan 31];Available from: URL: http://www.health.gov.on.ca/english/providers/pub/drugs/economic/economic_mn.html.

Sullivan, S. D., Lyles, A., Luce, B., & Grigar, J. (2001). AMCP guidance for submission of clinical and economic evaluation data to support formulary listing in U.S. health plans and pharmacy benefits management organizations. Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy, 7(4), 272–282.

NICE. (2004). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Ref Type: Pamphlet.

Brazier, J., Roberts, J., & Deverill, M. (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics, 21(2), 271–292.PubMedCrossRef

Brazier, J. E., & Roberts, J. (2004). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Medical Care, 42(9), 851–859.PubMedCrossRef

Harrison, M. J., Davies, L. M., Bansback, N. J., Ingram, M., Anis, A. H., & Symmons, D. P. (2008). The validity and responsiveness of generic utility measures in rheumatoid arthritis: A review. The Journal of Rheumatology, 35(4), 592–602.PubMed

Hurst, N. P., Kind, P., Ruta, D., Hunter, M., & Stubbings, A. (1997). Measuring health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis: Validity, responsiveness and reliability of EuroQol (EQ-5D). British Journal of Rheumatology, 36(5), 551–559.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Marra, C. A., Rashidi, A. A., Guh, D., Kopec, J. A., Abrahamowicz, M., Esdaile, J. M., et al. (2005). Are indirect utility measures reliable and responsive in rheumatoid arthritis patients? Quality of Life Research, 14, 1333–1344.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Russell, A. S., Conner-Spady, B., Mintz, A., Mallon, C., & Maksymowych, W. P. (2003). The responsiveness of generic health status measures as assessed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving infliximab. The Journal of Rheumatology, 30(5), 941–947.PubMed

12.

Conner-Spady, B., & Suarez-Almazor, M. E. (2003). Variation in the estimation of quality-adjusted life-years by different preference-based instruments. Medical Care, 41(7), 791–801.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Verstappen, S. M. M., McCoy, M. J., Roberts, C., Hassell, A. B., Dale, N. E., & Symmons, D. P. M. (2008). A 3 week course of IM steroid injection may prevent the progression of very early inflammatory polyarthritis: Results of the STIVEA trial. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 67(Suppl II), 61.

14.

Symmons, D., Tricker, K., Harrison, M., Roberts, C., Davis, M., Dawes, P., et al. (2006). Patients with stable long-standing rheumatoid arthritis continue to deteriorate despite intensified treatment with traditional disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs—results of the British Rheumatoid Outcome Study Group randomized controlled clinical trial. Rheumatology (Oxford), 45, 558–565.CrossRef

15.

Silman, A., Symmons, D., Scott, D. G., & Griffiths, I. (2003). British society for rheumatology biologics register. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 62(Suppl 2), ii28–ii29.PubMed

16.

The EuroQol Group. (1990). EuroQol–a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQol Group. Health Policy, 16(3), 199–208.CrossRef

17.

Ware, J. E, Jr., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30(6), 473–483.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Prevoo, M. L. L., Vanthof, M. A., Kuper, H. H., Vanleeuwen, M. A., Vandeputte, L. B. A., & Vanriel, P. L. C. M. (1995). Modified disease-activity scores that include 28-joint counts—development and validation in a prospective longitudinal-study of patients with rheumatoid-arthritis. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 38(1), 44–48.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Bansback, N., Harrison, M., Brazier, J., Davies, L., Kopec, J., Marra, C., et al. (2008). Health state utility values: A description of their development and application for rheumatic diseases. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 59(7), 1018–1026.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Symmons, D. P., Barrett, E. M., Bankhead, C. R., Scott, D. G., & Silman, A. J. (1994). The incidence of rheumatoid arthritis in the United Kingdom: Results from the Norfolk Arthritis Register. British Journal of Rheumatology, 33(8), 735–739.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Wiles, N. J., Lunt, M., Barrett, E. M., Bukhari, M., Silman, A. J., Symmons, D. P., et al. (2001). Reduced disability at five years with early treatment of inflammatory polyarthritis: Results from a large observational cohort, using propensity models to adjust for disease severity. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 44(5), 1033–1042.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Verstappen, S. M., Jacobs, J. W., Bijlsma, J. W., Heurkens, A. H., van Booma-Frankfort, C., Borg, E. J., et al. (2003). Five-year followup of rheumatoid arthritis patients after early treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs versus treatment according to the pyramid approach in the first year. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 48(7), 1797–1807.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Moreland, L. W., Schiff, M. H., Baumgartner, S. W., Tindall, E. A., Fleischmann, R. M., Bulpitt, K. J., et al. (1999). Etanercept therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. A randomized, controlled trial. Annals of Internal Medicine, 130(6), 478–486.PubMed

24.

Maini, R., St Clair, E. W., Breedveld, F., Furst, D., Kalden, J., Weisman, M., et al. (1999). Infliximab (chimeric anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha monoclonal antibody) versus placebo in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving concomitant methotrexate: A randomised phase III trial. ATTRACT Study Group. Lancet, 354(9194), 1932–1939.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Weinblatt, M. E., Keystone, E. C., Furst, D. E., Moreland, L. W., Weisman, M. H., Birbara, C. A., et al. (2003). Adalimumab, a fully human anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha monoclonal antibody, for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients taking concomitant methotrexate: The ARMADA trial. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 48(1), 35–45.PubMedCrossRef

26.

van Gestel, A. M., Haagsma, C. J., & van Riel, P. L. (1998). Validation of rheumatoid arthritis improvement criteria that include simplified joint counts. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 41, 1845–1850.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Grigor, C., Capell, H., Stirling, A., McMahon, A. D., Lock, P., Vallance, R., et al. (2004). Effect of a treatment strategy of tight control for rheumatoid arthritis (the TICORA study): A single-blind randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 364(9430), 263–269.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Anderson, J. J., Wells, G., Verhoeven, A. C., & Felson, D. T. (2000). Factors predicting response to treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: The importance of disease duration. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 43(1), 22–29.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Hider, S. L., Buckley, C., Silman, A., Symmons, D. P. M., & Bruce, I. N. (2004). Factors influencing response to disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The Journal of Rheumatology (in press).

30.

Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. New Jersey: Lawrence Earlbaum.

31.

Scott, D. L., Smith, C., & Kingsley, G. (2003). Joint damage and disability in rheumatoid arthritis: An updated systematic review. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology, 21(5 Suppl 31), S20–S27.PubMed

32.

Scott, D. L. (2007). Early rheumatoid arthritis. British Medical Bulletin, 81–82, 97–114.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Terwee, C. B., Dekker, F. W., Wiersinga, W. M., Prummel, M. F., & Bossuyt, P. M. M. (2003). On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: Guidelines for instrument evaluation. Quality of Life Research, 12(4), 349–362.PubMedCrossRef

34.

Norman, G. R., Wyrwich, K. W., & Patrick, D. L. (2007). The mathematical relationship among different forms of responsiveness coefficients. Quality of Life Research, 16(5), 815–822.PubMedCrossRef

35.

Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87(2), 245–251.CrossRef

36.

Meng, X. L., Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1992). Comparing correlated correlation-coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 111(1), 172–175.CrossRef

37.

Veenhof, C., Bijlsma, J. W. J., van den Ende, C. H. M., van Dijk, G. M., Pisters, M. F., & Dekker, J. (2006). Psychometric evaluation of osteoarthritis questionnaires: A systematic review of the literature. Arthritis Care and Research, 55(3), 480–492.PubMedCrossRef

38.

Marra, C. A., Marion, S. A., Guh, D. P., Najafzadeh, M., Wolfe, F., Esdaile, J. M., et al. (2007). Not all “quality-adjusted life years” are equal. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(6), 616–624.PubMedCrossRef

39.

Liang, M. H. (2000). Longitudinal construct validity: Establishment of clinical meaning in patient evaluative instruments. Medical Care, 38(9 suppl), II84–II90.PubMed

40.

Wright, J. G., & Young, N. L. (1997). A comparison of different indices of responsiveness. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 50(3), 239–246.PubMedCrossRef

41.

Husted, J. A., Cook, R. J., Farewell, V. T., & Gladman, D. D. (2000). Methods for assessing responsiveness: A critical review and recommendations. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 53(5), 459–468.PubMedCrossRef

42.

Pope, J. E., Khanna, D., Norrie, D., & Ouimet, J. M. (2009). The minimally important difference for the health assessment questionnaire in rheumatoid arthritis clinical practice is smaller than in randomized controlled trials. The Journal of Rheumatology, 36(2), 254–259.PubMedCrossRef

43.

Hays, R. D., & Hadorn, D. (1992). Responsiveness to change: An aspect of validity, not a separate dimension. Quality of Life Research, 1(1), 73–75.PubMedCrossRef

44.

Wolfe, F., & Hawley, D. J. (1997). Measurement of the quality of life in rheumatic disorders using the EuroQol. British Journal of Rheumatology, 36(7), 786–793.PubMedCrossRef

45.

Marra, C. A., Esdaile, J. M., Guh, D., Kopec, J. A., Brazier, J. E., Koehler, B. E., et al. (2004). A comparison of four indirect methods of assessing utility values in rheumatoid arthritis. Medical Care, 42(11), 1125–1131.PubMedCrossRef

46.

Briggs, A. H., O’Brien, B. J., & Blackhouse, G. (2002). Thinking outside the box: Recent advances in the analysis and presentation of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness studies. Annual Review of Public Health, 23, 377–401.PubMedCrossRef

47.

Claxton, K. (1999). The irrelevance of inference: A decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. Journal of Health Economics, 18(3), 341–364.PubMedCrossRef

48.

Wells, G. A., Tugwell, P., Kraag, G. R., Baker, P. R., Groh, J., & Redelmeier, D. A. (1993). Minimum important difference between patients with rheumatoid arthritis: The patient’s perspective. The Journal of Rheumatology, 20(3), 557–560.PubMed

49.

Kosinski, M., Zhao, S. Z., Dedhiya, S., Osterhaus, J. T., & Ware, J. E, Jr. (2000). Determining minimally important changes in generic and disease-specific health-related quality of life questionnaires in clinical trials of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 43(7), 1478–1487.PubMedCrossRef

Title: The comparative responsiveness of the EQ-5D and SF-6D to change in patients with inflammatory arthritis
Authors: M. J. Harrison
L. M. Davies
N. J. Bansback
M. J. McCoy
S. M. M. Verstappen
K. Watson
D. P. M. Symmons
The British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register Control Centre Consortium, on behalf of the BSRBR
Publication date: 01-11-2009
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Published in: Quality of Life Research / Issue 9/2009
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9539-2

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

The comparative responsiveness of the EQ-5D and SF-6D to change in patients with inflammatory arthritis

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 9/2009

The Maastricht social participation profile: development and clinimetric properties in older adults with a chronic physical illness

Factors associated with health-related quality of life after successful kidney transplantation: a population-based study

Gender-related traits, quality of life, and psychological adjustment among women with irritable bowel syndrome

Qualitative research and content validity: developing best practices based on science and experience

Measuring health-related quality of life in population-based studies of coronary heart disease: comparing six generic indexes and a disease-specific proxy score

SF-36 includes less Parkinson Disease (PD)-targeted content but is more responsive to change than two PD-targeted health-related quality of life measures