Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background:

The main measure to generate utility data for economic evaluations is the EQ-5D, but no study has tested whether or how to map from palliative care measures to the EQ-5D.

Aims:

To assess the level of conceptual overlap between palliative outcomes and the EQ-5D, and the feasibility of mapping between them to obtain utilities for the Palliative care Outcome Scale.

Design:

A cross-sectional secondary analysis of data from three studies.

Setting/participants:

Patients receiving palliative care and bereaved relatives, recruited from three tertiary National Health Service hospitals in South London.

Methods:

The overlap between both measures was assessed using principal component analysis. The Palliative care Outcome Scale was mapped onto the EQ-5D using three regression models.

Results:

Spearman’s correlations between both instruments were low (mean rho = 0.11). The principal component analysis showed the Palliative care Outcome Scale is associated with only two EQ-5D dimensions (pain; and anxiety/depression). No Palliative care Outcome Scale items loaded onto the mobility, self-care and usual activities dimensions of the EQ-5D. The mapping models performed poorly at predicting utilities from Palliative care Outcome Scale data (mean absolute error >0.3 and R² <0.10). Hence, none of the models can be recommended as acceptable for calculating utilities from Palliative care Outcome Scale responses.

Conclusion:

Differences between the Palliative care Outcome Scale and the EQ-5D do not undermine the qualities of either instrument when used for their own purposes. However, due to conceptual differences, the EQ-5D does not capture some of the concerns measured by the Palliative care Outcome Scale, and therefore, mapping onto the EQ-5D is unlikely to provide an appropriate basis for estimating utilities for conducting economic evaluations in palliative care studies.

Keywords

EQ-5D health-state utility modelling patient-reported outcomes palliative care outcome scale

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Dzingina

Higginson

IJ.

Public health and palliative care in 2015. Clin Geriatr Med 2015; 31: 253–263.

Rowen

Brazier

Young

. Deriving a preference-based measure for cancer using the EORTC QLQ-C30. Value Health 2011; 14: 721–731.

Sonntag

Konnopka

Leichsenring

. Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D in assessing and valuing health status in patients with social phobia. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2013; 11: 215.

Hurst

Kind

Ruta

. Measuring health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis: validity, responsiveness and reliability of EuroQol (EQ-5D). Rheumatology 1997; 36: 551–559.

Wichmann

Adang

Stalmeier

. The use of Quality-Adjusted Life Years in cost-effectiveness analyses in palliative care: mapping the debate through an integrative review. Palliat Med 2017; 31: 306–322.

Barton

Jacob

Gebsky

Utility-adjusted analysis of the cost of palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases. Australas Radiol 2003; 47: 274–278.

Albers

Echteld

de Vet

. Evaluation of quality-of-life measures for use in palliative care: a systematic review. Palliat Med 2010; 24: 17–37.

Hearn

Higginson

IJ.

Development and validation of a core outcome measure for palliative care: the palliative care outcome scale. Qual Health Care 1999; 8: 219–227.

Bausewein

Booth

Gysels

. Understanding breathlessness: cross-sectional comparison of symptom burden and palliative care needs in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and cancer. J Palliat Med 2010; 13: 1109–1118.

10.

Goodwin

Higginson

Myers

. Effectiveness of palliative day care in improving pain, symptom control, and quality of life. J Pain Symptom Manage 2003; 25: 202–212.

11.

Hall

Petkova

Tsouros

. Palliative care for older people: better practices. 2011, World Health Organization Europe, http://www.euro.who.int/en/publications/abstracts/palliative-care-for-older-people-better-practices

12.

Brazier

Yang

Tsuchiya

. A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures. Eur J Health Econ 2010; 11: 215–225.

13.

Buxton

Lacey

Feagan

. Mapping from disease-specific measures to utility: an analysis of the relationships between the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire and Crohn’s Disease Activity Index in Crohn’s disease and measures of utility. Value Health 2007; 10: 214–220.

14.

Brooks

EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996; 37: 53–72.

15.

Dolan

Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 1997; 35: 1095–1108.

16.

Siegert

Gao

Walkey

. Psychological well-being and quality of care: a factor-analytic examination of the palliative care outcome scale. J Pain Symptom Manage 2010; 40: 67–74.

17.

Gomes

McCrone

Hall

. Variations in the quality and costs of end-of-life care, preferences and palliative outcomes for cancer patients by place of death: the QUALYCARE study. BMC Cancer 2010; 10: 400.

18.

Higginson

Gao

Saleem

. Symptoms and quality of life in late stage Parkinson syndromes: a longitudinal community study of predictive factors. PLoS ONE 2012; 7: e46327.

19.

Johnson

Wichern

DW.

Applied multivariate statistical analysis. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1988.

20.

Kaiser

HF.

The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educ Psychol Meas 1960; 20: 141–151.

21.

Horn

A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika 1965; 30: 179–185.

22.

Watkins

A standalone Windows program that computes Parallel Analysis criteria (eigenvalues) by performing a Monte Carlo simulation. 2002, http://edpsychassociates.com/Watkins3.html (accessed 9 June 2016).

23.

Nunnally

JC.

Psychometric theory. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1978.

24.

Tabachnick

Fidell

Using multivariate statistics. 4th ed. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2001.

25.

Powell

JL.

Least absolute deviations estimation for the censored regression model. J Economet 1984; 25: 303–325.

26.

Gray

Rivero-Arias

Clarke

PM.

Estimating the association between SF-12 responses and EQ-5D utility values by response mapping. Med Decis Making 2006; 26: 18–29.

27.

Rivero-Arias

Ouellet

Gray

. Mapping the modified Rankin scale (mRS) measurement into the generic EuroQol (EQ-5D) health outcome. Med Decis Making 2010; 30: 341–354.

28.

Longworth

Yang

Young

. Use of generic and condition-specific measures of health-related quality of life in NICE decision-making: a systematic review, statistical modelling and survey. Health Technol Assess 2014; 18: 1–224.

29.

Teckle

McTaggart-Cowan

Van der Hoek

. Mapping the FACT-G cancer-specific quality of life instrument to the EQ-5D and SF-6D. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2013; 11: 203.

30.

Walters

Brazier

JE.

Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res 2005; 14: 1523–1532.

31.

Young

Mukuria

Rowen

. Mapping functions in health-related quality of life: mapping from two cancer-specific health-related quality-of-life instruments to EQ-5D-3L. Med Decis Making 2015; 35: 912–926.

32.

Greenberg

Parks

RP.

A predictive approach to model selection and multicollinearity. J Appl Econometrics 1997; 12: 67–75.

33.

Shmueli

To explain or to predict?

Statistic Sci 2010; 25: 289–310.

34.

Harris

McAuley

KB.

The use of simplified or misspecified models: linear case. Canad J Chem Eng 2007; 85: 386–398.

35.

Diehr

Yanez

Ash

. Methods for analyzing health care utilization and costs. Ann Rev Public Health 1999; 20: 125–144.

36.

Kilian

Matschinger

Loeffler

. A comparison of methods to handle skew distributed cost variables in the analysis of the resource consumption in schizophrenia treatment. J Mental Health Policy Econ 2002; 5: 21–31.

37.

Rowen

Brazier

Roberts

Mapping SF-36 onto the EQ-5D index: how reliable is the relationship?

Health Qual Life Outcomes 2009; 7: 1–9.

38.

Franks

Lubetkin

Gold

. Mapping the SF-12 to the EuroQol EQ-5D Index in a national US sample. Med Decis Making 2004; 24: 247–254.

39.

Kim

S-K

Kim

S-H

M-W

. Estimation of minimally important differences in the EQ-5D and SF-6D indices and their utility in stroke. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2015; 13: 32.

40.

Sullivan

Lawrence

Ghushchyan

A national catalog of preference-based scores for chronic conditions in the United States. Med Care 2005; 43: 736–749.

41.

Pickard

Neary

Cella

Estimation of minimally important differences in EQ-5D utility and VAS scores in cancer. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2007; 5: 70.

42.

Murtagh

FEM

Groeneveld

Kaloki

. Capturing activity, costs, and outcomes: the challenges to be overcome for successful economic evaluation in palliative care. Prog Palliat Care 2013; 21: 232–235.

43.

Round

Care at the end of life: an economic perspective. 1st ed. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016.

44.

Coast

Strategies for the economic evaluation of end-of-life care: making a case for the capability approach. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2014; 14: 473–482.

45.

Normand

Measuring outcomes in palliative care: limitations of QALYs and the road to PalYs. J Pain Symptom Manage 2009; 38: 27–31.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

4.39 MB

0.11 MB

0.01 MB

0.19 MB

0.01 MB

Does the EQ-5D capture the concerns measured by the Palliative care Outcome Scale? Mapping the Palliative care Outcome Scale onto the EQ-5D using statistical methods

Abstract

Background:

Aims:

Design:

Setting/participants:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusion:

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material