Background. The Medicare Health Outcomes Survey (HOS), a nationwide annual survey of Medicare beneficiaries, includes the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s HRQOL-4 questionnaire and Veterans RAND 12-item Health Survey (VR-12). This study compared EQ-5D scores derived from the HRQOL-4 (dEQ-5D) to SF-6D scores derived from VR-12. Methods. Data were from Medicare HOS Cohort 15 (2012 baseline; 2014 follow-up). We included participants aged 65+ (n = 105,473). We compared score distributions, evaluated known-groups validity, assessed each index as a predictor for mortality, and estimated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) using the dEQ-5D and SF-6D. Results. Compared to the SF-6D, the dEQ-5D had a higher mean score (0.787 v. 0.691) and larger standard deviation (0.310 v. 0.101). The decreases in estimated scores associated with chronic conditions were greater for the dEQ-5D than for the SF-6D. For example, dEQ-5D scores for persons with depression decreased 0.456 points compared to 0.141 points for the SF-6D. The dEQ-5D strongly predicted mortality, as adjusted hazard ratios for the first to fourth quintiles, relative to the fifth quintile, were 2.2, 1.7, 1.8, and 1.5, respectively, while the association between SF-6D and mortality was weaker or nonexistent (adjusted hazard ratios were 1.3, 1.1, 1.0, and 0.6, respectively). Compared to the SF-6D, QALYs estimated using the dEQ-5D were higher overall (5.6 v. 4.9 years), higher for persons with less debilitating conditions (e.g., hypertension, 5.0 v. 4.4 years), and lower for more debilitating conditions (e.g. depression, 2.5 v. 2.8 years). Conclusions. Compared to the SF-6D, the dEQ-5D was better able to measure individuals’ overall health; detect the differential impact of chronic conditions, particularly among persons in poorer health; and predict mortality. The HRQOL-4 questionnaire may be valuable for monitoring and improving health outcomes for the Medical HOS data set.
HickeyABarkerMMcGeeHO’BoyleC. Measuring health-related in older patient populations: a review of current approaches. Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(10):971–93.
FieldMJGoldMR, eds. Summarizing Population Health: Directions for the Development and Application of Population Metrics. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, National Academies Press; 1998.
JonesNJonesSLMillerNA. The Medicare Health Outcomes Survey program: overview, context, and near-term prospects. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004;2:33.
8.
GoldMRStevensonDFrybackDG. HALYS and QALYS and DALYS, oh my: similarities and differences in summary measures of population health. Annu Rev Public Health. 2002;23:115–34.
9.
Institute of Medicine. Valuing Health for Regulatory Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2006.
10.
GoldMRSiegelJERussellLBWeinsteinMC, eds. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.
11.
BrownDSJiaHZackMMThompsonWWHaddixACKaplanRM. Using health-related quality of life and quality-adjusted life expectancy for effective public health surveillance and prevention. Exp Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2013;13(4):425–7.
12.
AndersonGF. Medicare and chronic conditions. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:305–9.
13.
ZahranHSKobauRMoriartyDGet al. Health-related quality of life surveillance—United States, 1993–2002. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2005;54(4):1–35.
14.
BrazierJERobertsJ. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Med Care. 2004;42(9):851–9.
15.
BrazierJRobertsJDeverillM. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ. 2002;21(2):271–92.
16.
SelimAJRogersWFleishmanJAet al.Updated U.S. population standard for the Veterans RAND 12-item Health Survey (VR-12). Qual Life Res. 2009;18(1):43–52.
17.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Measuring Healthy Days: Population Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Division of Adult and Community Health. 2000. Available from http://www.cdc.gov/hrqol/pdfs/mhd.pdf
18.
JiaHLubetkinEI. Estimating EuroQol EQ-5D scores from Population Healthy Days data. Med Decis Making. 2008;28(4):491–9.
19.
JiaHZackMMMoriartyDGFrybackDG. Predicting the EuroQol Group’s EQ-5D Index from CDC’s “Healthy Days” in a US sample. Med Decis Making. 2011;31(1):174–85.
20.
JiaHZackHHThompsonWW. State quality-adjusted life expectancy for U.S. adults from 1993 to 2008. Qual Life Res. 2011;20(6):853–63.
21.
JiaHZackMMThompsonWW. The effects of diabetes, hypertension, asthma, heart disease, and stroke on quality-adjusted life expectancy. Value Health. 2013;16(1):140–7.
22.
RothmanMLHedrickSCBulcroftKAHickamDHRubensteinLZ. The validity of proxy-generated scores as measures of patient health status. Med Care. 1991;29(2):115–24.
23.
JanssenMFBonselGJLuoN. Is EQ-5D-5L better than EQ-5D-3L? A head-to-head comparison of descriptive systems and value sets from seven countries. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018;36(6):675–97.
24.
JiaHLubetkinEI. Impact of nine chronic conditions for US adults aged 65 years and older: an application of a hybrid estimator of quality-adjusted life years throughout remainder of lifetime. Qual Life Res. 2016;25(8):1921–9.
25.
BharmalMThomasJIII. Comparing the EQ-5D and the SF-6D descriptive systems to assess their ceiling effects in the US general population. Value Health. 2006;9(4):262–71.
26.
PetrouSHockleyC. An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population. Health Econ. 2005;14:1169–89.
27.
SakthongPMunpanW. A head-to-head comparison of UK SF-6D and Thai and UK EQ-5D-5L value sets in Thai patients with chronic diseases. App Health Econ Health Policy. 2017;15(5):669–79.
28.
WhitehurstDGBryanS. Another study showing that two preference-based measures of health-related quality of life (EQ-5D and SF-6D) are not interchangeable: but why should we expect them to be?Value Health. 2011;14(4):531–8.
29.
SachTBartonGJenkinsonCet al. Comparing cost-utility estimates: does the choice of EQ-5D or SF-6D matter?Med Care. 2009;47(8):889–94.
30.
JooreMBrunenbergDNelemansPet al. The impact of differences in EQ-5D and SF-6D utility scores on the acceptability of cost-utility ratios: results across five trial-based cost-utility studies. Value Health. 2010;13(2):222–9.
31.
BrazierJRobertsJTsuchiyaABusschbachJ. A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Econ. 2004;13:873–84.
32.
BrownDSThompsonWWZackMMArnoldSEBarileJP. Associations between health-related quality of life and mortality in older adults. Prev Sci. 2015;16(1):21–30.
33.
TsaiSYChiLYLeeCHChouP. Health-related quality of life as a predictor of mortality among community-dwelling older persons. Eur J Epidemiol. 2007;22(1):19–26.
34.
DorrDAJonesSSBurnsLet al. Use of health-related, quality-of-life metrics to predict mortality and hospitalizations in community-dwelling seniors. J Am Geriat Soc. 2006;54(4):667–73.
35.
CrosbyRDKolotkinRLWilliamsGR. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56(5):395–407.
36.
PickardASNearyMPCellaD. Estimation of minimally important differences in EQ-5D utility and VAS scores in cancer. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2007;5:70.
37.
YangFDevlinNLuoN. Impact of mapped EQ-5D utilities on cost-effectiveness analysis: in the case of dialysis treatments. Eur J Health Econ. 2018Jun14. [Epub ahead of print]
38.
JiaHZackMMThompsonWWDubeSR. Quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) due to smoking in the United States. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(1):27–35.
39.
ByhoffEHarrisJAAyanianJZ. Characteristics of decedents in Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(7):1020–3.
40.
MillerDRRogersWHKazisLESpiroARenXSHafferSC. Patients’ self-report of diseases in the Medicare Health Outcomes Survey based on comparisons with linked survey and medical data from the Veterans Health Administration. J Ambul Care Manage. 2008;31(2):161–77.
41.
SelimAJRogersWQianSXBrazierJKazisLE. A preference-based measure of health: the VR-6D derived from the veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey. Qual Life Res. 2011;20(8):1337–47.
42.
SlabaughSLShahMZackMet al. Leveraging health-related quality of life in population health management: the case for healthy days. Population Health Manage. 2017;20(1):13–22.
43.
KazisLBiermanADiehrPet al. A white paper report commissioned by CMS with recommendations for the Medicare Health Outcomes Survey. Submitted to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Baltimore, Maryland, October26, 2007.
