An evaluation of EQ-5D-3L health utility scores using five country-specific tariffs in a rural population aged 45–69 years in Hua county, Henan province, China
Hui Wang,Changqi Cao,Chuanhai Guo,Yu He,Fenglei Li,Ruiping Xu,Mengfei Liu,Zhen Liu,Yaqi Pan,Fangfang Liu,Ying Liu,Jingjing Li,Hong Cai,Zhonghu He,Yang Ke
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01476-z
IF: 3.077
2020-07-13
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Abstract:Abstract Background This study aims to compare the performance of the recently developed Chinese (city) tariff of the EQ-5D-3L against the UK, US, Japanese and Korean tariffs in a general rural population in China. Methods From November 2015 to September 2016, 12,085 permanent residents aged 45–69 from 257 villages randomly selected from Hua County, Henan Province, China, were interviewed using EQ-5D-3L, and a one-on-one questionnaire investigation was used to collect data on factors associated with HRQOL. The health utility scores were calculated using the UK, US, Japanese, Korean and Chinese (city) tariffs. The agreement, known-groups validity and sensitivity of these five tariffs were evaluated. Transition scores for pairs of observed EQ-5D-3L health states were calculated and compared. Results The Korean tariff yielded the highest mean health utility score (0.963), followed by the Chinese (city) (0.948), US (0.943), UK (0.930) and Japanese (0.921) tariffs, but the differences in the scores of any two tariffs did not exceed the MCID. The Chinese (city) tariff showed higher ICC values (ICCs> 0.89, 95% CI:0.755–0.964) and narrower limits of agreement (0.099–0.167) than the Korean tariff [(ICCs> 0.71, 95% CI:0.451–0.955); (0.146–0.253)]. The Chinese (city) tariff had a higher relative efficiency and effect size statistics in 10 out of 11 variables as compared to the UK, US and Japanese tariffs. The Chinese (city) tariff (0.215) was associated with moderate mean absolute transition scores compared with the UK (0.342), US (0.230), Japanese (0.149) and Korean (0.189) tariffs for 1485 observed pairs of the EQ-5D-3L health states. Conclusions Health utility scores derived from the five tariffs differed. The Chinese (city) tariff was the most suitable of these tariffs and was without obvious weakness. We recommend adopting the Chinese (city) tariff when applying EQ-5D-3L to assess quality of life among the elderly in China’s agricultural region with socio-economic status similar to Hua County. Results of this study had provided a crucial basis for health surveys, health promotion projects, health intervention trials, and health economic evaluation taking HRQOL as a target in rural areas of China.
health care sciences & services,health policy & services