Skip header and navigation

1 records – page 1 of 1.

Assessing quality of life in a clinical study on heart rehabilitation patients: how well do value sets based on given or experienced health states reflect patients' valuations?
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016;14:48
Publication Type
Reiner Leidl
Bernd Schweikert
Harry Hahmann
Juergen M Steinacker
Peter Reitmeir
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016;14:48
Publication Type
Acute Coronary Syndrome - psychology - rehabilitation
Aged, 80 and over
Inpatients - psychology
Middle Aged
Outpatients - psychology
Patient satisfaction
Quality of Life - psychology
Regression Analysis
Self Report
Surveys and Questionnaires
Quality of life as an endpoint in a clinical study may be sensitive to the value set used to derive a single score. Focusing on patients' actual valuations in a clinical study, we compare different value sets for the EQ-5D-3L and assess how well they reproduce patients' reported results.
A clinical study comparing inpatient (n = 98) and outpatient (n = 47) rehabilitation of patients after an acute coronary event is re-analyzed. Value sets include: 1. Given health states and time-trade-off valuation (GHS-TTO) rendering economic utilities; 2. Experienced health states and valuation by visual analog scale (EHS-VAS). Valuations are compared with patient-reported VAS rating. Accuracy is assessed by mean absolute error (MAE) and by Pearson's correlation ?. External validity is tested by correlation with established MacNew global scores. Drivers of differences between value sets and VAS are analyzed using repeated measures regression.
EHS-VAS had smaller MAEs and higher ? in all patients and in the inpatient group, and correlated best with MacNew global score. Quality-adjusted survival was more accurately reflected by EHS-VAS. Younger, better educated patients reported lower VAS at admission than the EHS-based value set. EHS-based estimates were mostly able to reproduce patient-reported valuation. Economic utility measurement is conceptually different, produced results less strongly related to patients' reports, and resulted in about 20 % longer quality-adjusted survival.
Decision makers should take into account the impact of choosing value sets on effectiveness results. For transferring the results of heart rehabilitation patients from another country or from another valuation method, the EHS-based value set offers a promising estimation option for those decision makers who prioritize patient-reported valuation. Yet, EHS-based estimates may not fully reflect patient-reported VAS in all situations.
Cites: Qual Life Res. 2015 Feb;24(2):513-2025124253
Cites: Qual Life Res. 2002 Mar;11(2):173-8312018740
Cites: Rehabilitation (Stuttg). 2003 Dec;42(6):343-914677105
Cites: J Health Econ. 1986 Mar;5(1):1-3010311607
Cites: Heart. 2006 Jan;92(1):62-715797936
Cites: Health Econ. 2006 Jul;15(7):653-6416498700
Cites: Med Care. 2009 Feb;47(2):255-6119169128
Cites: Value Health. 2009 Mar;12 Suppl 1:S5-919250132
Cites: Pharmacoeconomics. 2009;27(9):767-7919757870
Cites: Eur J Health Econ. 2005 Jun;6(2):124-3019787848
Cites: Clin Res Cardiol. 2009 Dec;98(12):787-9519821135
Cites: Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010;8:1320109189
Cites: Med Decis Making. 2010 Jul-Aug;30(4):E57-6320511562
Cites: Swiss Med Wkly. 2011;140:w1314121213150
Cites: Health Econ. 2011 Mar;20(3):348-6121308856
Cites: Value Health. 2009 Jul-Aug;12(5):750-819490564
Cites: Pharmacoeconomics. 2011 Jun;29(6):521-3421247225
Cites: Value Health. 2012 Jan;15(1):151-722264983
Cites: Qual Life Res. 2012 Sep;21(7):1205-1621971874
Cites: Qual Life Res. 2014 Mar;23(2):431-4223975375
Cites: Qual Life Res. 2015 Mar;24(3):693-70325246184
Cites: Acta Orthop. 2014 Jun;85(3):244-924786908
Cites: Value Health. 2014 Jun;17(4):364-7124968996
Cites: Eur J Health Econ. 2014 Jul;15(6):577-8923771769
Cites: Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014 May;11(5):4939-5224810579
PubMed ID
27005466 View in PubMed
Less detail