IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v38y2020i8d10.1007_s40273-020-00905-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experience-Based Swedish TTO and VAS Value Sets for EQ-5D-5L Health States

Author

Listed:
  • Kristina Burström

    (Karolinska Institutet
    Karolinska Institutet)

  • Fitsum Sebsibe Teni

    (Karolinska Institutet)

  • Ulf-G. Gerdtham

    (Lund University
    Lund University)

  • Reiner Leidl

    (German Research Center for Environmental Health
    Ludwig-Maximilians University)

  • Gert Helgesson

    (Karolinska Institutet)

  • Ola Rolfson

    (Karolinska Institutet
    University of Gothenburg
    Sahlgrenska University Hospital
    Centre of Registers Västra Götaland)

  • Martin Henriksson

    (Linköping University)

Abstract

Background and Objective Although value sets for the five-level version of the generic health-related quality-of-life instrument EQ-5D are emerging, there is still no value set available in the literature based on time trade-off valuations made by individuals experiencing the valued health states. The aim of this study was to estimate experience-based value sets for the EQ-5D-5L for Sweden using time trade-off and visual analogue scale valuation methods. Methods In a large, cross-sectional, population-based, self-administered postal health survey, the EQ-5D-5L descriptive system, EQ visual analogue scale and a time trade-off question were included. Time trade-off and visual analogue scale valuations of the respondent’s current health status were used in statistical modelling to estimate a single-index value of health for each of the 3125 health states. Ordinary least-squares and generalised linear models were estimated with the main effect within each of the five dimensions represented by 20 dummy variables reflecting the additional decrement in value for levels 2–5 when the severity increases by one level sequentially beginning from having no problem. Interaction variables representing the occurrence of severity levels in at least one of the dimensions were tested: severity level 2 or worse (N2); severity level 3 or worse (N3); severity level 4 or worse (N4); severity level 5 (N5). Results A total of 896 health states (28.7% of the 3125 possible EQ-5D-5L health states) were reported by the 25,867 respondents. Visual analogue scale (n = 23,899) and time trade-off (n = 13,381) responders reported valuations of their currently experienced health state. The preferred regression models used ordinary least-squares estimation for both time trade-off and visual analogue scale values and showed consistency in all coefficients after combining certain levels. Levels 4 and 5 for the dimensions of mobility, self-care and usual activities were combined in the time trade-off model. Including the interaction variable N5, indicating severity level 5 in at least one of the five dimensions, made it possible to distinguish between the two worst severity levels where no other dimension is at level 5 as this coefficient is applied only once. In the visual analogue scale regression model, levels 4 and 5 of the mobility dimension were combined. The interaction variables N2–N4 were included, indicating that each of these terms reflect a statistically significant decrement in visual analogue scale value if any of the dimensions is at severity level 2, 3 or 4, respectively. Conclusions Time trade-off and visual analogue scale value sets for the EQ-5D-5L are now available for Sweden. The time trade-off value set is the first such value set based on experience-based time trade-off valuation. For decision makers with a preference for experience-based valuations of health states from a representative population-based sample, the reported value sets may be considered fit for purpose to support resource allocation decision as well as evaluating population health and healthcare performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristina Burström & Fitsum Sebsibe Teni & Ulf-G. Gerdtham & Reiner Leidl & Gert Helgesson & Ola Rolfson & Martin Henriksson, 2020. "Experience-Based Swedish TTO and VAS Value Sets for EQ-5D-5L Health States," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(8), pages 839-856, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:38:y:2020:i:8:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00905-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-020-00905-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-020-00905-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-020-00905-7?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ogorevc, Marko & Murovec, Nika & Fernandez, Natacha Bolanos & Rupel, Valentina Prevolnik, 2019. "Questioning the differences between general public vs. patient based preferences towards EQ-5D-5L defined hypothetical health states," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 166-172.
    2. Kristina Ludwig & J.-Matthias Graf von der Schulenburg & Wolfgang Greiner, 2018. "German Value Set for the EQ-5D-5L," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 663-674, June.
    3. Burstrom, Kristina & Johannesson, Magnus & Diderichsen, Finn, 2006. "A comparison of individual and social time trade-off values for health states in the general population," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 359-370, May.
    4. Patricia Cubi-Molla & Koonal Shah & Kristina Burström, 2018. "Experience-Based Values: A Framework for Classifying Different Types of Experience in Health Valuation Research," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 11(3), pages 253-270, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Chris Sampson’s journal round-up for 3rd August 2020
      by Chris Sampson in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2020-08-03 11:00:00

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Huang, Li & Devlin, Nancy & Chen, Gang & Dalziel, Kim, 2024. "A happiness approach to valuing health states for children," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 348(C).
    2. Eva-Carin Lindgren & Jeanette Källstrand & Åsa Alftberg & Pia Johansson & Lars Kristén & Linn Håman & Andreas Ivarsson & Ing-Marie Carlsson, 2022. "Empowerment-Based Physical Activity Intervention for People with Advanced Dry Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Mixed-Methods Protocol," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Mathilde Sengoelge & Alexander Nissen & Øivind Solberg, 2022. "Post-Migration Stressors and Health-Related Quality of Life in Refugees from Syria Resettled in Sweden," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-14, February.
    4. Persson, Ulf & Olofsson, Sara, 2020. "Quality-of-Life in the Swedish general population during Covid-19 – based on measurement pre- and post pandemic outbreak," IHE Report / IHE Rapport 2020:7, IHE - The Swedish Institute for Health Economics.
    5. Qingqing Chai & Zhihao Yang & Xiaoyan Liu & Di An & Jiangyang Du & Xiumei Ma & Kim Rand & Bin Wu & Nan Luo, 2024. "Valuation of EQ-5D-5L health states from cancer patients’ perspective: a feasibility study," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(6), pages 915-924, August.
    6. Sun Sun & Håkan Jonsson & Klas-Göran Salén & Mats Andén & Lars Beckman & Per Fransson, 2023. "Is ultra-hypo-fractionated radiotherapy more cost-effective relative to conventional fractionation in treatment of prostate cancer? A cost–utility analysis alongside a randomized HYPO-RT-PC trial," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(2), pages 237-246, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elliott, Jack & Tsuchiya, Aki, 2022. "Do they just know more, or do they also have different preferences? An exploratory analysis of the effects of self-reporting serious health problems on health state valuation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    2. Koonal K. Shah & Juan Manuel Ramos-Goñi & Simone Kreimeier & Nancy J. Devlin, 2020. "An exploration of methods for obtaining 0 = dead anchors for latent scale EQ-5D-Y values," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(7), pages 1091-1103, September.
    3. Nathan S. McClure & Mike Paulden & Arto Ohinmaa & Jeffrey A. Johnson, 2021. "Modifying the quality-adjusted life year calculation to account for meaningful change in health-related quality of life: insights from a pragmatic clinical trial," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(9), pages 1441-1451, December.
    4. Christina Pichler & Johanna Freidl & Michael Bischof & Martin Kiem & Renate Weisböck-Erdheim & Daniela Huber & Gabriella Squarra & Paul Clemens Murschetz & Arnulf Hartl, 2022. "Mountain Hiking vs. Forest Therapy: A Study Protocol of Novel Types of Nature-Based Intervention," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-17, March.
    5. Sullivan, Trudy & Hansen, Paul & Ombler, Franz & Derrett, Sarah & Devlin, Nancy, 2020. "A new tool for creating personal and social EQ-5D-5L value sets, including valuing ‘dead’," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    6. Sebastian Himmler & Job van Exel & Werner Brouwer, 2020. "Happy with Your Capabilities? Valuing ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A States Based on Experienced Utility Using Subjective Well-Being Data," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 40(4), pages 498-510, May.
    7. Thomas Grochtdreis & Hans-Helmut König & Anju Devianee Keetharuth & Jürgen Gallinat & Alexander Konnopka & Holger Schulz & Martin Lambert & Anne Karow & Judith Dams, 2023. "Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Recovering Quality of Life (ReQoL) measures in patients with affective disorders," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(4), pages 499-512, June.
    8. Versteegh, M.M. & Brouwer, W.B.F., 2016. "Patient and general public preferences for health states: A call to reconsider current guidelines," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 66-74.
    9. Thomas Rückschloß & Julius Moratin & Sven Zittel & Maximilian Pilz & Christoph Roser & Michael Engel & Christian Freudlsperger & Jürgen Hoffmann & Oliver Ristow, 2021. "Influence of Preventive Tooth Extractions on Quality of Life in Patients with Antiresorptive Intake—A Prospective Longitudinal Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-10, November.
    10. Menyfah Q. Alanazi & Waleed Abdelgawwad & Thamer A. Almangour & Fatma Mostafa & Mona Almuheed, 2023. "Impact of COVID-19 on the Health-Related Quality of Life of Patients during Infection and after Recovery in Saudi Arabia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-14, March.
    11. Chen-Wei Pan & Jun-Yi He & Yan-Bo Zhu & Chun-Hua Zhao & Nan Luo & Pei Wang, 2023. "Comparison of EQ-5D-5L and EORTC QLU-C10D utilities in gastric cancer patients," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(6), pages 885-893, August.
    12. Weidong Huang & Hongjuan Yu & Chaojie Liu & Guoxiang Liu & Qunhong Wu & Jin Zhou & Xin Zhang & Xiaowen Zhao & Linmei Shi & Xiaoxue Xu, 2017. "Assessing Health-Related Quality of Life of Chinese Adults in Heilongjiang Using EQ-5D-3L," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, February.
    13. Elena Olariu & Wael Mohammed & Yemi Oluboyede & Raluca Caplescu & Ileana Gabriela Niculescu-Aron & Marian Sorin Paveliu & Luke Vale, 2023. "EQ-5D-5L: a value set for Romania," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(3), pages 399-412, April.
    14. Meg Perry-Duxbury & Sebastian Himmler & Job Exel & Werner Brouwer, 2023. "Willingness to pay for health gains from an international integrated early warning system for infectious disease outbreaks," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(6), pages 967-986, August.
    15. Touré, Moustapha & Poder, Thomas G., 2024. "Differences in health utilities between cancer patients and the general population: The case of Quebec using the SF-6Dv2," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 351(C).
    16. Patricia Cubi-Molla & Koonal Shah & Kristina Burström, 2018. "Experience-Based Values: A Framework for Classifying Different Types of Experience in Health Valuation Research," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 11(3), pages 253-270, June.
    17. Richard Edlin & Christopher McCabe & David Meads, 2013. "Assignment errors and the valuation of EQ-5D health states-do responses mean what we think they mean?," Working Papers 1304, Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds.
    18. Spencer, Anne & Rivero-Arias, Oliver & Wong, Ruth & Tsuchiya, Aki & Bleichrodt, Han & Edwards, Rhiannon Tudor & Norman, Richard & Lloyd, Andrew & Clarke, Philip, 2022. "The QALY at 50: One story many voices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 296(C).
    19. Finch, Aureliano Paolo & Meregaglia, Michela & Ciani, Oriana & Roudijk, Bram & Jommi, Claudio, 2022. "An EQ-5D-5L value set for Italy using videoconferencing interviews and feasibility of a new mode of administration," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    20. Lan Gao & Wei Luo & Utsana Tonmukayakul & Marj Moodie & Gang Chen, 2021. "Mapping MacNew Heart Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire onto country-specific EQ-5D-5L utility scores: a comparison of traditional regression models with a machine learning technique," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(2), pages 341-350, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:pharme:v:38:y:2020:i:8:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00905-7. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.