Bibliographic Details
| Title: |
Validity and responsiveness of generic preference-based HRQOL instruments in chronic epilepsy. |
| Authors: |
Langfitt, J. T., Vickrey, B. G., McDermott, M. P., Messing, S., Berg, A. T., Spencer, S. S., Sperling, M. R., Bazil, C. W., Shinnar, S. |
| Source: |
Quality of Life Research. Jun2006, Vol. 15 Issue 5, p899-914. 16p. 7 Charts. |
| Subjects: |
Epilepsy, Quality of life, Chronic diseases, Psychometrics, Spasms |
| Abstract: |
Generic, preference-based instruments are recommended for assessing health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in cost-utility analyses (CUA). We aimed to determine which instrument is the most appropriate for CUA of epilepsy care, using established psychometric criteria. We compared validity and responsiveness of EQ5D (using both UK and US preferences), visual analog scale (VAS), Health Utilities Index Mark II (HUI-2) and Mark III (HUI-3) and SF6D in 165 adults evaluated for epilepsy surgery. SF6D had the strongest or next-strongest associations with seizure severity and seizure control. It was not associated with education or IQ. Only SF6D and HUI-3 discriminated between patients with and without seizures 2 years after baseline evaluation. SF6D was most or next-most responsive to being seizure-free for 2 years, in most responsiveness analyses. VAS was also responsive, but showed less evidence of validity. The QOLIE-89, an epilepsy-targeted profile instrument, had stronger evidence for validity and responsiveness than the preference instruments. SF6D has several key psychometric advantages over four other preference instruments in CUAs of epilepsy care. This may reflect better coverage of HRQOL dimensions affected by epilepsy, greater sensitivity at the upper end of the HRQOL continuum, or both. These findings may not generalize to other chronic conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of Quality of Life Research is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| Database: |
Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
