Suppr超能文献

欧洲五维度健康量表(EuroQol EQ-5D-5L)与美国疾病控制与预防中心(CDC)健康天数指标在评估人群健康方面的比较表现

Comparative performance of the EuroQol EQ-5D-5L and the CDC healthy days measures in assessing population health.

作者信息

Derkach Maryna, Al Sayah Fatima, Ohinmaa Arto, Svenson Lawrence W, Johnson Jeffrey A

机构信息

Alberta PROMs and EQ-5D Research and Support Unit (APERSU), School of Public Health, University of Alberta, 2-040 Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Research Innovation, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E1, Canada.

Alberta Health, Station Main, PO Box 1360, Edmonton, AB, T5J 2N3, Canada.

出版信息

J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2022 Jun 13;6(1):64. doi: 10.1186/s41687-022-00474-7.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To examine the comparative performance of EuroQol EQ-5D-5L and Center for Disease Control Healthy Days measures in assessing population health.

METHODS

Using data from 2014 Alberta Community Health Survey, a cross-sectional population-based survey (N = 7559), conducted in Alberta, Canada, we examined construct validity of the measures as indicators of population health. Differences in EQ-5D-5L index score, visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS), and CDC unhealthy days index across socio-demographic subgroups were tested by Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests using known-groups approach.

RESULTS

EQ-5D-5L and CDC Healthy Days provided comparable assessments of population health in this sample. Both measures discriminated between subgroups defined by self-perceived health status, level of education, and material deprivation. The discriminative ability of CDC Healthy Days was limited in capturing variability in health among age groups compared to the EQ-5D-5L. Among participants who reported 0 unhealthy days, the proportion of those with level 3 problems in pain/discomfort varied from 1.1% for participants aged 18-24 to 19.2% for those over 75 years.

CONCLUSIONS

EQ-5D-5L demonstrated better construct validity than CDC Healthy Days in assessing health in a population-based sample of adults.

摘要

目的

考察欧洲五维度健康量表(EuroQol EQ - 5D - 5L)和美国疾病控制与预防中心健康日指标在评估人群健康方面的比较表现。

方法

利用2014年艾伯塔社区健康调查的数据,这是一项在加拿大艾伯塔省开展的基于人群的横断面调查(N = 7559),我们检验了这些指标作为人群健康指标的结构效度。采用已知组方法,通过曼 - 惠特尼检验和克鲁斯卡尔 - 沃利斯检验,对社会人口学亚组间的EQ - 5D - 5L指数得分、视觉模拟量表(EQ - VAS)以及美国疾病控制与预防中心不健康日指数的差异进行了检验。

结果

在本样本中,EQ - 5D - 5L和美国疾病控制与预防中心健康日指标对人群健康的评估结果相当。这两种指标在由自我感知健康状况、教育水平和物质匮乏程度所定义的亚组之间都具有区分能力。与EQ - 5D - 5L相比,美国疾病控制与预防中心健康日指标在捕捉不同年龄组健康差异方面的区分能力有限。在报告0个不健康日的参与者中,疼痛/不适程度为3级问题的参与者比例在18 - 24岁的参与者中为1.1%,在75岁以上的参与者中为19.2%。

结论

在基于人群的成人样本中评估健康状况时,EQ - 5D - 5L的结构效度优于美国疾病控制与预防中心健康日指标。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eaf6/9192869/f6ce1229b87d/41687_2022_474_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparative performance of the EuroQol EQ-5D-5L and the CDC healthy days measures in assessing population health.
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2022 Jun 13;6(1):64. doi: 10.1186/s41687-022-00474-7.
2
Health-related quality of life measured using the EQ-5D-5L: South Australian population norms.
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016 Sep 20;14(1):133. doi: 10.1186/s12955-016-0537-0.
5
The EQ-5D-5L Is Superior to the -3L Version in Measuring Health-related Quality of Life in Patients Awaiting THA or TKA.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2019 Jul;477(7):1632-1644. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000662.
7
Comparison of the preference-based EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD).
Eur J Health Econ. 2015 Dec;16(9):1019-26. doi: 10.1007/s10198-014-0664-7. Epub 2014 Dec 18.
8
10
Head-to-head comparison between the EQ-5D-5L and the EQ-5D-3L in general population health surveys.
Popul Health Metr. 2018 Aug 16;16(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s12963-018-0170-8.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

1
Validity of the EQ-5D-5L and reference norms for the Spanish population.
Qual Life Res. 2018 Sep;27(9):2337-2348. doi: 10.1007/s11136-018-1877-5. Epub 2018 May 16.
2
Comparative performance of the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D index scores in adults with type 2 diabetes.
Qual Life Res. 2017 Aug;26(8):2057-2066. doi: 10.1007/s11136-017-1559-8. Epub 2017 Mar 31.
3
Health Related Quality of Life in a Dutch Rehabilitation Population: Reference Values and the Effect of Physical Activity.
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 6;12(1):e0169169. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169169. eCollection 2017.
4
Comparing the performance of the EQ-5D-3L and the EQ-5D-5L in young Portuguese adults.
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016 Jun 8;14:89. doi: 10.1186/s12955-016-0491-x.
5
Leveraging Health-Related Quality of Life in Population Health Management: The Case for Healthy Days.
Popul Health Manag. 2017 Feb;20(1):13-22. doi: 10.1089/pop.2015.0162. Epub 2016 Mar 31.
6
The EQ-5D-5L health status questionnaire in COPD: validity, responsiveness and minimum important difference.
Thorax. 2016 Jun;71(6):493-500. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2015-207782. Epub 2016 Mar 30.
7
8
Comparison of health-related quality-of-life measurement instruments in diabetic patients.
Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip. 2014 Jul 4;28(4):769-774. doi: 10.1080/13102818.2014.935572. Epub 2014 Sep 23.
9
Data Resource Profile: German Health Update (GEDA)--the health interview survey for adults in Germany.
Int J Epidemiol. 2015 Apr;44(2):442-50. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyv067. Epub 2015 May 15.
10
A comparison between the EQ-5D and the SF-6D in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
PLoS One. 2014 Nov 7;9(11):e112389. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0112389. eCollection 2014.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验