Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Population reference data based on self-reported EQ-5D constitute a valuable resource in a broad range of settings. Within the UK, EQ-5D has been included in national population surveys for over 30 years, notably as part of the Health Survey for England, however, the extent to which such data varies over time remains largely unknown. Methods Between 1996 and 2014, the Health Survey for England included the original 3-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L) and provides data from more than 100,000 respondents; these data form the basis of the present study. Age-stratified rates of reporting any problem in EQ-5D dimensions were computed for men and women; these were standardised using 1996 as the index year. Logit regression was used to examine the influence of year respondent socio-demographic characteristics, and current health status on rates of reporting any problems in EQ-5D-3L. The data of self-rated health status recorded on a 0-100 scale (EQ VAS) was also analyzed. Results More than 30% report a problem with Pain/Discomfort with around 20% reporting a problem with Anxiety/Depression, Mobility having a similar problem rate, about 18%. Some 5% of respondents report a problem with Self Care. After an initial fall from 1996, self-reported health remains relatively stable across 10 years, however between 2008 and 2012 rates of reporting any problem increased, particularly in the Anxiety/Depression dimension and amongst older women. Logit regression analysis demonstrates that most of the covariates had statistically significant coefficients, such as age, gender, education, economic activity, income, and long-standing illness/condition. Conclusions The study demonstrates the stability of EQ-5D responses over time in HSE data from 1996 to 2014. However, there is evidence of periodic deterioration in health status notably in the years immediately after 2007. Further investigation of this effect could have implications for the interpretation and use of population data based on EQ-5D. The study demonstrates the importance in national surveys of the general population of regular collection of health status data using a standardised measure of health-related quality of life.

Background With an increasing awareness of people’s satisfaction and feeling, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has become an essential aspect of measuring health. HRQoL is fundamentally a foreign concept introduced to China from the West. While a growing number of studies applied western HRQoL measures, few content validity tests examined the legitimacy of applying Western developed HRQoL measures in a Chinese cultural setting. If there are distinct differences in health conceptualisation between China and the West, it can be argued that those western measures may fail to ask the most appropriate and important questions among a Chinese population in assessing health. As a limited number of studies have investigated Chinese people’s understandings of health, this study aimed to explore how health is defined and described in China. Methods A Q-methodological study was conducted to explore subjective constructions of health among Chinese participants. A scoping review of Chinese generic HRQoL measures, supplemented by a series of qualitative interviews conducted in China, produced a list of 42 statements representing aspects of health considered as being important in a Chinese cultural setting. Chinese participants in face-to-face interviews ranked and sorted these statements. Data were analysed to identify clusters of participants who shared a similar perspective, using a by-person factor analysis procedure. Results 110 Chinese participants with various demographics characteristics completed sorting interviews. Five independent factors emerged: (I) “Physical independence and social interaction skills”; (II) “Physical health”; (III) “Sensations and feelings”; (IV) “Lifestyles”; (V) “Learning and working abilities”. Conclusions The Q-study showed that many health statements were rated highly as most important by a diverse range of Chinese participants but were not covered in the commonly used Western HRQoL measure EQ-5D. It then suggests that the EQ-5D descriptive system might need modification to improve its capacity to measure health status in China. The study thus raises a general question as to how appropriate the Western-developed HRQoL measures are when used to assess health in a significantly different cultural setting.

Little is known about the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of men living with advanced prostate cancer. We report population-wide functional outcomes and HRQOL in men with all stages of prostate cancer and identify implications for health-care delivery. For this population-based study, men in the UK living 18–42 months after diagnosis of prostate cancer were identified through cancer registration data. A postal survey was administered, which contained validated measures to assess functional outcomes (urinary incontinence, urinary irritation and obstruction, bowel, sexual, and vitality and hormonal function), measured with the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite short form (EPIC-26), plus questions about use of interventions for sexual dysfunction) and generic HRQOL (assessed with the 5-level EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire [EQ-5D-5L] measuring mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain or discomfort, and anxiety or depression, plus a rating of self-assessed health). Log-linear and binary logistic regression models were used to compare functional outcomes and HRQOL across diagnostic stages and self-reported treatment groups. Each model included adjustment for age, socioeconomic deprivation, and number of other long-term conditions. 35 823 (60·8%) of 58 930 men responded to the survey. Disease stage was known for 30 733 (85·8%) of 35 823 men; 19 599 (63·8%) had stage I or II, 7209 (23·4%) stage III, and 3925 (12·8%) stage IV disease. Mean adjusted EPIC-26 domain scores were high, indicating good function, except for sexual function, for which scores were much lower. Compared with men who did not receive androgen deprivation therapy, more men who received the therapy reported moderate to big problems with hot flushes (30·7% [95% CI 29·8–31·6] vs 5·4% [5·0–5·8]), low energy (29·4% [95% CI 28·6–30·3] vs 14·7% [14·2–15·3]), and weight gain (22·5%, 21·7–23·3) vs 6·9% [6·5–7·3]). Poor sexual function was common (81·0%; 95% CI 80·6–81·5), regardless of stage, and more than half of men (n=18 782 [55·8%]) were not offered any intervention to help with this condition. Overall, self-assessed health was similar in men with stage I–III disease, and although slightly reduced in those with stage IV cancer, 23·5% of men with metastatic disease reported no problems on any EQ-5D dimension. Men diagnosed with advanced disease do not report substantially different HRQOL outcomes to those diagnosed with localised disease, although considerable problems with hormonal function and fatigue are reported in men treated with androgen deprivation therapy. Sexual dysfunction is common and most men are not offered helpful intervention or support. Service improvements around sexual rehabilitation and measures to reduce the effects of androgen deprivation therapy are required. The Movember Foundation, in partnership with Prostate Cancer UK.

The EQ-5D instrument is now used in many health systems as a health outcomes measure. Recently an EQ-5D valuation study was conducted for Trinidad and Tobago, but thus far there have been no population norms published for Trinidad and Tobago or for any Caribbean country. The objective of this study is to provide a set of population norms, and to investigate inequalities in health in Trinidad and Tobago. The EQ-5D-5L questionnaire was included in the 2012/2013 Adult Population Survey of the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor for Trinidad and Tobago. This survey covered a representative sample of 2,036 adults aged 18 and over. Demographic data and self-reported health using EQ-5D-5L were collected. The Trinidad and Tobago value set was used to obtain EQ-5D index values. The Kakwani index and logistic regression models were used to evaluate inequalities in health. Mean EQ-5D index values and EQ-VAS values were calculated by age group, ethnicity, gender, income, educational attainment, employment status and place of residence. The 10 most commonly observed EQ-5D-5L states accounted for 90% of the respondents. The mean VAS value for the sample was 83.6 and the mean EQ-5D-5L index value was 0.95. Pain/discomfort was found to be the EQ-5D dimension with the highest prevalence of reported problems with 22% of the population reporting pain at any level. Self-care was the dimension with the lowest prevalence of problems reported at any level (3%). Health declines with increasing age, and men reported fewer problems and higher levels of self-reported health than women. Age, gender and education level were found to be important drivers of health status as measured by the EQ-5D instrument. Being in a very low income group was also observed to affect EQ-VAS values among younger respondents. The population norms provided in this study can be used by clinicians, academics and policy makers in several ways. They can be used in comparing different demographic groups or patient groups, or as a basis for tracking the progress of patients through a treatment regimen. They can also provide a baseline for cost utility analysis of health interventions for Trinidad and Tobago.

Purpose To develop a self-report version of the EQ-5D for younger respondents, named the EQ-5D-Y (Youth); to test its comprehensibility for children and adolescents and to compare results obtained using the standard adult EQ-5D and the EQ-5D-Y. Methods An international task force revised the content of EQ-5D and wording to ensure relevance and clarity for young respondents. Children's and adolescents' understanding of the EQ-5D-Y was tested in cognitive interviews after the instrument was translated into German, Italian, Spanish and Swedish. Differences between the EQ-5D and the EQ-5D-Y regarding frequencies of reported problems were investigated in Germany, Spain and South Africa. Results The content of the EQ-5D dimensions proved to be appropriate for the measurement of HRQOL in young respondents. The wording of the questionnaire had to be adapted which led to small changes in the meaning of some items and answer options. The adapted EQ-5D-Y was satisfactorily understood by children and adolescents in different countries. It was better accepted and proved more feasible than the EQ-5D. The administration of the EQ-5D and of the EQ-5D-Y causes differences in frequencies of reported problems. Conclusions The newly developed EQ-5D-Y is a useful tool to measure HRQOL in young people in an ageappropriate manner.

Purpose To measure and analyse national EQ-5D data and to provide norms for the Chinese general population by age, sex, educational level, income and employment status. Methods The EQ-5D instrument was included in the National Health Services Survey 2008 (n = 120,703) to measure health-related quality of life (HRQoL). All descriptive analyses by socio-economic status (educational level, income and employment status) and by clinical characteristics (discomfort during the past 2 weeks, diagnosed with chronic diseases during the past 6 months and hospitalised during the past 12 months) were stratified by sex and age group. Results Health status declines with advancing age, and women reported worse health status than men, which is in line with EQ-5D population health studies in other countries and previous population health studies in China. The EQ-5D instrument distinguished well for the known groups: positive association between socio-economic status and HRQoL was observed among the Chinese population. Persons with clinical characteristics had worse HRQoL than those without. Conclusions This study provides Chinese population HRQoL data measured by the EQ-5D instrument, based on a national representative sample. The main findings for different subgroups are consistent with results from EQ-5D population studies in other countries, and discriminative validity was supported.

Background Approximately 1.5 million adults in the UK have a learning disability. The difference between age at death for this group and the general population is 26 years for females and 22 years for males. The NHS Long Term Plan (January 2019) recognises learning disabilities as a clinical priority area. People with a learning disability are often excluded from research by design or lack of reasonable adjustments, and self-reported health status/health-related quality of life questionnaires such as the EQ-5D are often not appropriate for this population. Here, we systematically examine the EQ-5D-3L (its wording, content, and format) using qualitative methods to inform the adaption of the measure for use with adults with mild to moderate learning disabilities. Methods Think-aloud interviews with carers/advocates of learning-disabled adults were undertaken to explore the difficulties with completing the EQ-5D-3L. Alternative wording, language, structure, and images were developed using focus groups, stakeholder reference groups, and an expert panel. Data analysis followed a framework method. Results The dimensions and levels within the EQ-5D-3L were deemed appropriate for adults with mild to moderate learning disabilities. Consensus on wording, structure, and images was reached through an iterative process, and an adapted version of the EQ-5D-3L was finalised. Conclusion The EQ-5D-3L adapted for adults with mild to moderate intellectual/learning disabilities can facilitate measurement of self-reported health status. Research is underway to assess the potential use of the adaptation for economic evaluation.

Purpose To examine the feasibility, reliability, and validity of the newly developed EQ-5D-Y. Methods The EQ-5D-Y was administered in population samples of children and adolescents in Germany, Italy, South Africa, Spain, and Sweden. Percentages of missing values and reported problems were calculated. Test-retest reliability was determined. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients with other generic measures of HRQOL were calculated. Known groups' validity was examined by comparing groups with a priori expected differences in HRQOL. Results Between 91 and 100% of the respondents provided valid scorings. Sweden had the lowest proportion of reported problems (1-24.9% across EQ-5D-Y dimensions), with the highest proportions in South Africa (2.8-47.3%) and Italy (4.3-39.0%). Percentages of agreement in testretest reliability ranged between 69.8 and 99.7% in the EQ-5D-Y dimensions; Kappa coefficients were up to 0.67. Correlation coefficients with other measures of self-rated health indicated convergent validity (up to r= — 0.56). Differences between groups classified according to presence of chronic conditions, self-rated overall health and psychological problems provided preliminary evidence of known groups' validity. Conclusions Results provide preliminary evidence of the instrument's feasibility, reliability and validity. Further study is required in clinical samples and for possible future applications in economic analyses.

Background The EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L are two generic health-related quality of life measures, which may be used in clinical and health economic research. They measure impairment in 5 aspects of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in measuring the self-reported health status of older patients with substantial multimorbidity and associated polypharmacy. Methods Between 2017 and 2019, we administered EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L to a subset of patients participating in the OPERAM trial at 6 months and 12 months after enrolment. The OPERAM trial is a two-arm multinational cluster randomised controlled trial of structured medication review assisted by a software-based decision support system versus usual pharmaceutical care, for older people (aged ≥ 70 years) with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. In the psychometric analyses, we only included participants who completed the measures in full at 6 and 12 months. We assessed whether responses to the measures were consistent by assessing the proportion of EQ-5D-5L responses, which were 2 or more levels away from that person’s EQ-5D-3L response. We also compared the measures in terms of informativity, and discriminant validity and responsiveness relative to the Barthel Index, which measures independence in activities of daily living. Results 224 patients (mean age of 77 years; 56% male) were included in the psychometric analyses. Ceiling effects reported with the EQ-5D-5L (22%) were lower than with the EQ-5D-3L (29%). For the mobility item, the EQ-5D-5L demonstrated better informativity (Shannon’s evenness index score of 0.86) than the EQ-5D-3L (Shannon’s evenness index score of 0.69). Both the 3L and 5L versions of EQ-5D demonstrated good performance in terms of discriminant validity, i.e. (out of all items of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L, the pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression items had the weakest correlation with the Barthel Index. Both the 3L and 5L versions of EQ-5D demonstrated good responsiveness to changes in the Barthel Index. Conclusion Both EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L demonstrated validity and responsiveness when administered to older adults with substantial multimorbidity and polypharmacy who were able to complete the measures.

Objectives Resource allocation is a challenging issue faced by health policy decisionmakers requiring careful consideration of many factors. Objectives of this study were to identify decision criteria and their frequency reported in the literature on healthcare decisionmaking. Method An extensive literature search was performed in Medline and EMBASE to identify articles reporting healthcare decision criteria. Studies conducted with decisionmakers (e.g., focus groups, surveys, interviews), conceptual and review articles and articles describing multicriteria tools were included. Criteria were extracted, organized using a classification system derived from the EVIDEM framework and applying multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) principles, and the frequency of their occurrence was measured. Results Out of 3146 records identified, 2790 were excluded. Out of 356 articles assessed for eligibility, 40 studies included. Criteria were identified from studies performed in several regions of the world involving decisionmakers at micro, meso and macro levels of decision and from studies reporting on multicriteria tools. Large variations in terminology used to define criteria were observed and 360 different terms were identified. These were assigned to 58 criteria which were classified in 9 different categories including: health outcomes; types of benefit; disease impact; therapeutic context; economic impact; quality of evidence; implementation complexity; priority, fairness and ethics; and overall context. The most frequently mentioned criteria were: equity/fairness (32 times), efficacy/effectiveness (29), stakeholder interests and pressures (28), cost-effectiveness (23), strength of evidence (20), safety (19), mission and mandate of health system (19), organizational requirements and capacity (17), patient-reported outcomes (17) and need (16). Conclusion This study highlights the importance of considering both normative and feasibility criteria for fair allocation of resources and optimized decisionmaking for coverage and use of healthcare interventions. This analysis provides a foundation to develop a questionnaire for an international survey of decisionmakers on criteria and their relative importance. The ultimate objective is to develop sound multicriteria approaches to enlighten healthcare decisionmaking and priority-setting.