Marra Carlo A, Woolcott John C, Kopec Jacek A, Shojania Kamran, Offer Robert, Brazier John E, Esdaile John M, Anis Aslam H
Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, 717-828 West 10th Ave, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6Z 1Y6.
Soc Sci Med. 2005 Apr;60(7):1571-82. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.08.034.
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a common, chronic disease where health-related quality of life (HRQL) is one of the main goals of therapy. As such, instruments used to measure HRQL in RA must be able to discriminate across RA severity. The two basic categories of instruments used to measure HRQL are generic instruments and disease-specific instruments. Generic instruments can be further subdivided into preference-based measures which yield both single and multi-attribute utility values anchored at zero (death) and 1.00 (perfect health) as a measure of HRQL. The scores from these types of instruments can be integrated into cost-utility analyses as the weightings for quality adjusted life years. We assessed the construct validity of utility scores from four generic preference-based measures (the Health Utilities Index 2 and 3 (HUI2, HUI3), the EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D), and the Short Form 6-D (SF-6D) and disease specific measures (the Rheumatoid Arthritis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RAQoL) and the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)) in a sample of 313 RA patients in British Columbia, Canada. We also estimated the minimally important differences (MID) for each of the measures. Generally, as anticipated, the disease-specific measures were better able to discriminate across groups with higher RA severity; however, utility scores from each of the scales also appeared to discriminate well across RA severity categories. The MID values agreed with those previously reported in the literature for the HUI2, SF-6D and the HAQ and provided new information for the HUI3, EQ-5D and the RAQoL. We conclude that the all of the preference-based utility measures that were evaluated appear to adequately discriminate across levels of RA severity.
类风湿性关节炎(RA)是一种常见的慢性疾病,与健康相关的生活质量(HRQL)是治疗的主要目标之一。因此,用于测量类风湿性关节炎患者HRQL的工具必须能够区分不同严重程度的类风湿性关节炎。用于测量HRQL的工具主要分为两类:通用工具和疾病特异性工具。通用工具可进一步细分为基于偏好的测量方法,该方法可得出以零(死亡)和1.00(完全健康)为锚定的单属性和多属性效用值,以此作为HRQL的一种测量方式。这些类型工具的得分可作为质量调整生命年的权重纳入成本效用分析。我们在加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省的313例类风湿性关节炎患者样本中,评估了四种基于通用偏好的测量方法(健康效用指数2和3(HUI2、HUI3)、欧洲五维健康量表(EQ-5D)和简式六维健康量表(SF-6D))以及疾病特异性测量方法(类风湿性关节炎生活质量问卷(RAQoL)和健康评估问卷(HAQ))的效用得分的结构效度。我们还估计了每种测量方法的最小重要差异(MID)。一般来说,正如预期的那样,疾病特异性测量方法在区分类风湿性关节炎严重程度较高的组方面表现更好;然而,每个量表的效用得分在区分不同类风湿性关节炎严重程度类别方面似乎也表现良好。MID值与先前文献中报道的HUI2、SF-6D和HAQ的值一致,并为HUI3、EQ-5D和RAQoL提供了新信息。我们得出结论,所有评估的基于偏好的效用测量方法似乎都能充分区分不同程度的类风湿性关节炎严重程度。