Search

Background: Strategies to improve public health may benefit from targeting specific lifestyles associated with poor health behaviors and outcomes. The aim of this study was to characterize and examine the relationship between health and lifestyle-related attitudes (HLAs) and self-rated health and life-satisfaction.Methods: Secondary analyses were conducted on data from a 2012 community wellness survey in Kirklees, UK. Using a validated HLA tool, respondents (n = 9130) were categorized into five segments: health conscious realists (33%), balanced compensators (14%), live-for-todays (18%), hedonistic immortals (10%), and unconfident fatalists (25%). Multivariate regression was used to examine whether HLAs could explain self-rated health using the EQ-5D visual analog scale (EQ-VAS) and life-satisfaction. Health conscious realists served as the reference group.Results: Self-rated health differed by HLA, with adjusted mean EQ-VAS scores being significantly higher (better) among balanced compensators (1.15, 95% CI 0.27, 2.03) and lower scores among unconfident fatalists (- 9.02, 95% CI - 9.85, - 8.21) and live-for-todays (- 1.96, 95% CI - 2.80, - 1.14). Balanced compensators were less likely to report low life-satisfaction (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.62, 0.90), while unconfident fatalists were most likely to have low life-satisfaction (OR 3.51, 95% CI 2.92, 4.23).Significance: Segmentation by HLA explained differences in self-rated health and life-satisfaction, with unconfident fatalists being a distinct segment with significantly worse health perceptions and life-satisfaction. Health promotion efforts may benefit from considering the HLA segment that predominates a patient group, especially unconfident fatalists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare five preference-based generic measures of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in terms of change scores, correlations among change scores, responsiveness, and quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained.Design: Observational longitudinal cohort study where clinical measures and self-assessed HRQOL measures were administered to stroke patients at baseline and at 6 months. Patients were categorized as 'stable', 'some improvement' and 'large improvement' using the Barthel Index, Modified Rankin Scale (MRS), and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). For each group, paired t-tests and variants of effect size were used to compare the responsiveness of preference-based HRQOL summary scores, including the EQ-5D VAS and index-based score, SF-6D, and Health Utilities Index (HUI) Mark 2 (HUI2) and Mark 3 (HUI3) overall utility scores.Results: Ninety-eight of 124 (79%) patients completed the 6-month follow-up. Change scores of the EQ-Index, HUI2, and HUI3 were strongly correlated with changes in the Barthel Index and MRS, while the EQ-5D VAS had higher correlation with CES-D change scores than the other measures. The SF-6D, HUI3, and EQ-Index were generally more responsive than the HUI2 and EQ-5D Visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS). QALY estimates based on the EQ-5D index and HUI3 were twice as large as estimates based on the SF-6D and HUI2.Conclusions: The results of this study may assist in informing the selection of a preference-based generic HRQOL measure, although choice will also depend on study goals and context. We would caution against the generalization of the study results on responsiveness to conditions when more subtle change is expected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Caregiver burden (CB) is typically self-assessed by caregivers. However, an emerging concept is assessment of CB by the recipients of care, i.e., the patient. The specific objectives are (1) to assess the level of agreement between care recipients' and caregivers' view on CB, across financial, physical, emotional, and social domains; (2) to explore two care recipient perspectives: their self-perceived burden (CR-SPB), and their interpretation of the caregiver's view (Proxy-CB). Methods: Data were collected from 504 caregiver-care recipient dyads in the U.S. using an online Qualtrics panel. The survey assessed caregiver burden using CarerQol and newly developed items. The level of agreement between responses was quantified using weighted kappa (κ) coefficients for individual items and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for index/summary scores. Results: The average age of caregivers was 49.2 years, and 62.7 years for care recipients. Dyads most commonly consisted of spouses/partners (34.5%); 68.3% lived together. Proxy-CB aligned more closely with caregiver's view, with moderate to substantial agreement across CB domains (from κ = 0.48 for emotional to κ = 0.66 for financial). In the same perspective, the CarerQol-7D Index showed moderate agreement (ICC = 0.58) and the summary score of CB items substantial agreement (ICC = 0.76). Care recipients generally overestimated CB in the Proxy-CB perspective, while they underestimated it in the CR-SPB perspective. Conclusion: Results demonstrate there is a difference between perspectives. Strong agreement in Proxy-CB perspective suggests that care recipients can potentially substitute for caregivers depending on the domain. CR-SPB agrees less with caregivers and may provide complementary information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Only one pilot value set (UK) is currently available for the EQ Health and Wellbeing Instrument short version (EQ-HWB-S). As an alternative to preference-weighted scoring, we examined whether a level summary score (LSS) is appropriate for the EQ-HWB-S using Mokken scaling analyses. Methods: Data from patients, carers and the general population collected during the developmental phase of the EQ-HWB-S in Australia, US and UK were used, noting 3 of 9 items have since undergone revision. EQ-HWB-S data fit was examined using R package Mokken scaling's monotone homogeneity model, utilizing the automated item selection procedure (AISP) as well as Loevinger's scaling coefficients for items and the scale (HS). Manifest monotonicity was assessed by examining whether the cumulative probability for responses at or above each response level did not decrease across the summary score. Results: EQ-HWB-S data were available for 3340 respondents: US = 903, Australia = 514 and UK = 1923. Mean age was 50 ± 18 and 1841 (55%) were female. AISP placed all 9 items of the EQ-HWB-S on a single scale when the lower bound was set to < 0.448. Strong scalability (HS = 0.561) was found for the EQ-HWB-S as a single scale. Stronger scales were formed by separating the psychosocial items (n = 6, HS = 0.683) and physical sensation items (n = 3, HS = 0.713). No violations of monotonicity were found except for the items mobility and daily activities for the subgroups with long-term conditions and UK subjects, respectively. Discussion: As EQ-HWB-S items formed a strong scale and subscales based on Mokken analysis, LSS is a promising weighting-free approach to scoring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The EQ-5D-5L is a well-established health questionnaire that estimates health utilities by applying preference-based weights. Limited work has been done to examine alternative scoring approaches when utility weights are unavailable or inapplicable. We examined whether the Mokken scaling approach can elucidate 1) if the level summary score is appropriate for the EQ-5D-5L and 2) an interpretation of such a score.Methods: The R package "mokken" was used to assess monotonicity (scaling coefficients H, automated item selection procedure) and manifest invariant item ordering (MIIO: paired item response functions [IRF], HT). We used a rich dataset (the Multiple Instrument Comparison, MIC) which includes EQ-5D-5L data from six Western countries.Results: While all EQ-5D-5L items demonstrated monotonicity, the anxiety/depression (AD) item had weak scalability (Hi = 0.377). Without AD, scalability improved from Hs = 0.559 to Hs = 0.714. MIIO revealed that the 5 items can be ordered, and the ordering is moderately accurate in the MIC data (HT = 0.463). Excluding AD, HT improves to 0.743. Results were largely consistent across disease and country subgroups.Discussion: The 5 items of the EQ-5D-5L form a moderate to strong Mokken scale, enabling persons to be ordered using the level summary score. Item ordering suggests that the lower range of the score represents mainly problems with pain and anxiety/depression, the mid-range indicates additional problems with mobility and usual activities, and middle to higher range of scores reveals additional limitations with self-care. Scalability and item ordering are even stronger when the anxiety/depression item is not included in the scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare online, unsupervised and face-to-face (F2F), supervised valuation of EQ-5D-5L health states using composite time trade-off (cTTO) tasks.Methods: The official EuroQol experimental design and valuation protocol for the EQ-5D-5L of 86 health states were implemented in interviewer-assisted, F2F and unsupervised, online studies. Validity of preferences was assessed using prevalence of inconsistent valuations and expected patterns of TTO values. Respondent task engagement was measured using number of trade-offs and time per task. Trading patterns such as better-than-dead only was compared between modes. Value sets were generated using linear regression with a random intercept (RILR). Value set characteristics such as range of scale and dimension ranking were evaluated between modes.Results: Five hundred one online and 1,134 F2F respondents completed the surveys. Mean elicited TTO values were higher online than F2F when compared by health state severity. Compared to F2F, a larger proportion of online respondents did not assign the poorest EQ-5D-5L health state (i.e., 55555) the lowest TTO value ([Online] 41.3% [F2F] 12.2%) (p < 0.001). A higher percentage of online cTTO tasks were completed in 3 trade-offs or fewer ([Online] 15.8% [F2F] 3.7%), (p < 0.001). When modeled using the RILR, the F2F range of scale was larger than online ([Online] 0.600 [F2F] 1.307) and the respective dimension rankings differed.Conclusions: Compared to F2F data, TTO tasks conducted online had more inconsistencies and decreased engagement, which contributed to compromised data quality. This study illustrates the challenges of conducting online valuation studies using the TTO approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Normative scores (norms) allow for comparisons between population(s) of interest and the general population, which is useful for burden of disease studies and cost-effectiveness analysis. The primary aim of this study was to estimate US visual analogue scale (EQ VAS) and utility-based norms for the EQ-5D-5L using the face-to-face sample. The secondary aim was to compare norms estimated in the face-to-face and online populations.Methods: This study estimated population norms from two general population surveys: (a) face-to-face and (b) online. In these surveys, respondents provided their health state using the EQ-5D-5L health classifier and the EQ VAS. Descriptive statistics, including mean, standard deviation (SD), 95% confidence interval, and median for the 5L utility and EQ VAS were estimated for each sample and across relevant respondent characteristics to serve as the basis for US EQ-5D-5L norms RESULTS: Face-to-face sample respondents (n = 1134) were representative of the US adult general population. In this sample, mean (SD) utility decreased with increasing age until age 45 or greater (age 45-54: 0.816 (0.249) age 55-64: 0.815 (0.243) age 65-74: 0.824 (0.217) age 75 + : 0.811 (0.218)). With increasing age, more problems were reported on all dimensions except anxiety/depression; a smaller proportion of respondents age 65 and older reported problems with anxiety/depression (23.8%) as compared to the youngest respondents (42.1%). Online (n = 2018) mean utility and EQ VAS values were consistently lower than the face-to-face sample.Conclusions: The availability of US EQ-5D-5L norms facilitates interpretation and understanding of general population and patient health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pembrolizumab (PEMBRO) and ipilimumab + nivolumab (IPI + NIVO) are approved advanced melanoma (AM) immunotherapies. To address limited health-related quality of life (QoL) real-world evidence with immunotherapies in AM, we compared QoL in AM patients receiving either treatment in clinical practice.Methods: A prospective US observational study enrolled adult AM patients initiating first-line PEMBRO or IPI + NIVO between June 2017 and March 2018. Endpoints included the QLQ-C30 global health score (GHS) and EuroQol visual analog scale (EQ-VAS) scores. Mean changes were compared using repeated measures mixed-effects models and are presented covariate adjusted.Results: 225 PEMBRO and 187 IPI + NIVO patients were enrolled. From baseline through week 24, PEMBRO was associated with 3.2 mean GHS score increase (95% CI 0.5, 5.9; p = .02), while no change was observed with IPI + NIVO; 0.2 (95% CI - 2.6, 3.0; p = 0.87). Among objective treatment-responders, GHS scores associated with PEMBRO increased 6.0 (95% CI 3.1, 8.8; p < .0001); IPI + NIVO patients increased 3.8 (95% CI 0.8, 6.9; p = .01). In treatment non-responders, IPI + NIVO was associated with GHS/QoL deterioration of - 3.7 (95% CI - 6.8, - 0.6; p = .02), PEMBRO non-responders demonstrated no change; 0.7 (95% CI - 2.3, 3.7; p = 0.6). Between treatments, PEMBRO patients increased 2.6 greater in EQ-VAS (95% CI 0.6, 4.5; p = .01) vs IPI + NIVO at 24 weeks.Conclusions: PEMBRO was associated with better 24-week QoL compared to IPI + NIVO in actual clinical practice settings. Real-world data has known limitations, but with further confirmation these results may have implications for treatment selection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To compare self-rated health among the United States general population in 2002 and 2017.Methods: Secondary data were analyzed from two EQ-5D valuation studies conducted in 2002 and 2017. Both studies included the EQ-5D-3L self-classifier and visual analog scale (VAS), where health is rated from 0 (worst imaginable health) to 100 (best imaginable health). VAS scores were compared between time points using regression models, adjusting for sociodemographic factors (Model 1), plus illness (Model 2), and health problems according to the EQ-5D classifier (Model 3).Results: Mean VAS scores in 2002 [84.4 (SD = 16.1)] were not different from 2017 [84.6 (SD = 14.5)] (p = 0.63), nor different after adjusting for demographics (Model 1) or illness (Model 2). However, 2017 VAS mean scores were significantly higher than 2002 [2.2 (95% CI 1.36-3.10)] upon adjusting for the presence of dimension-specific health problems.Conclusions: Self-rated health of the general US adult population in 2017 was similar to 2002, but after adjusting for health problems, scores were slightly higher in 2017. Sociodemographic shifts in age and education explain some of the differences in scores, and by removing health and sociodemographic factors, we found the VAS reveals self-rated health is slightly better in 2017 than 2002. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]