Displaying all 2 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Valuation of EQ-5D-5L health states: a comparison of seven Asian populations
    Wang P, Liu GG, Jo MW, Purba FD, Yang Z, Gandhi M, et al.
    Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res, 2019 Aug;19(4):445-451.
    PMID: 30523723 DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2019.1557048
    Objectives: To compare the time trade-off (TTO) utility values of EQ-5D-5L health states elicited from different general populations in Asia. Methods: We analyzed the TTO data from seven Asian EQ-5D-5L valuation studies in which utility values of 86 EQ-5D-5L health states were elicited from general population samples. An eight-parameter multiplicative regression model including five dimension parameters (mobility [MO], self-care, usual activities [UA], pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) and three level parameters (level 2 [L2], level 3 [L3], and level 4 [L4]) was used to model the data from each of the populations. The model coefficients were compared to understand how the valuations of EQ-5D-5L health states differ. Results: For dimension parameters, Korea and Indonesia generally had the highest and lowest values among the populations, respectively; UA and MO commonly had the highest and lowest values among the parameters, respectively. For level parameters, Singapore and Korea generally had the highest and lowest values, respectively; L2 showed less variance compared to L3 and L4. Koreans, Indonesians, and Singaporeans appeared to have different health preferences compared with other populations. Conclusion: Utility values of EQ-5D-5L health states differ among Asian populations, suggesting that each health system should establish and use its own value set.
  2. Do health preferences differ among Asian populations? A comparison of EQ-5D-5L discrete choice experiments data from 11 Asian studies
    Yang Z, Purba FD, Shafie AA, Igarashi A, Wong EL, Lam H, et al.
    Qual Life Res, 2022 Feb 18.
    PMID: 35181827 DOI: 10.1007/s11136-021-03075-x
    INTRODUCTION: Many countries have established their own EQ-5D value sets proceeding on the basis that health preferences differ among countries/populations. So far, published studies focused on comparing value set using TTO data. This study aims to compare the health preferences among 11 Asian populations using the DCE data collected in their EQ-5D-5L valuation studies.

    METHODS: In the EQ-VT protocol, 196 pairs of EQ-5D-5L health states were valued by a general population sample using DCE method for all studies. DCE data were obtained from the study PI. To understand how the health preferences are different/similar with each other, the following analyses were done: (1) the statistical difference between the coefficients; (2) the relative importance of the five EQ-5D dimensions; (3) the relative importance of the response levels.

    RESULTS: The number of statistically differed coefficients between two studies ranged from 2 to 16 (mean: 9.3), out of 20 main effects coefficients. For the relative importance, there is not a universal preference pattern that fits all studies, but with some common characteristics, e.g. mobility is considered the most important; the relative importance of levels are approximately 20% for level 2, 30% for level 3, 70% for level 4 for all studies.

    DISCUSSION: Following a standardized study protocol, there are still considerable differences in the modeling and relative importance results in the EQ-5D-5L DCE data among 11 Asian studies. These findings advocate the use of local value set for calculating health state utility.

Related Terms
    Try searching for something
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links