Barton Garry R, Hodgekins Jo, Mugford Miranda, Jones Peter B, Croudace Tim, Fowler David
School of Medicine, Health Policy and Practice, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK.
Br J Psychiatry. 2009 Aug;195(2):170-7. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.108.057380.
The UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has recommended that cost-effectiveness analysis includes the EQ-5D; however, this is often not implemented in the area of mental health.
To assess the appropriateness of using the EQ-5D to measure improvements in mental health.
Seventy-seven participants with psychosis were rated according to the EQ-5D and seven measures of mental health at both pre- and post-intervention. To assess construct validity we compared the (pre-intervention) mean EQ-5D scores for those with milder and more severe scores, according to each of the seven measures. To assess responsiveness we estimated the mean EQ-5D change score for those who improved (post-intervention), according to each of the measures.
The mean EQ-5D score was more favourable for both those with milder scores (mean difference: 0.044 to 0.301) and for those who improved post-intervention (mean change: 0.029 to 0.117).
This suggests the EQ-5D should be considered for use in future cost-effectiveness studies in the area of mental health.
英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)建议成本效益分析应纳入EQ-5D;然而,在心理健康领域这一建议常常未得到执行。
评估使用EQ-5D来衡量心理健康改善情况的适宜性。
77名患有精神病的参与者在干预前后分别根据EQ-5D和七种心理健康测量方法进行评分。为评估结构效度,我们根据七种测量方法中的每一种,比较了病情较轻和较重参与者(干预前)的平均EQ-5D得分。为评估反应度,我们根据每一种测量方法,估算了干预后病情有所改善的参与者的平均EQ-5D变化得分。
对于病情较轻的参与者(平均差异:0.044至0.301)以及干预后病情有所改善的参与者(平均变化:0.029至0.117),平均EQ-5D得分均更为有利。
这表明在未来心理健康领域的成本效益研究中应考虑使用EQ-5D。