IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v38y2018i8p983-993.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing the Performance of 2 Health Utility Measures in the Medicare Health Outcome Survey (HOS)

Author

Listed:
  • Haomiao Jia
  • Erica I. Lubetkin
  • Kimberly DeMichele
  • Debra S. Stark
  • Matthew M. Zack
  • William W. Thompson

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Haomiao Jia & Erica I. Lubetkin & Kimberly DeMichele & Debra S. Stark & Matthew M. Zack & William W. Thompson, 2018. "Comparing the Performance of 2 Health Utility Measures in the Medicare Health Outcome Survey (HOS)," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(8), pages 983-993, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:38:y:2018:i:8:p:983-993
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X18808494
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X18808494
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X18808494?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:38:y:2018:i:8:p:983-993. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.