The Responsiveness of Quality of Life Utilities to Change in Depression: A Comparison of Instruments (SF-6D, EQ-5D, and DFD)

Abstract Background Utilities are often a main outcome parameter in economic evaluations. Because depression has a large influence on quality of life, it is expected that utilities are responsive to changes in depression. Objective To evaluate the change in utility derived from different instruments...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Value in health 2011-07, Vol.14 (5), p.732-739
Main Authors: Gerhards, Sylvia A.H., MSc, Huibers, Marcus J.H., PhD, Theunissen, Kevin A.T.M., MSc, de Graaf, L. Esther, PhD, Widdershoven, Guy A.M., PhD, Evers, Silvia M.A.A., PhD
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
depression
Depression - diagnosis
Depression - psychology
Depression - therapy
depression-free-day
EQ-5D
Female
Health Status
Health Status Indicators
Humans
Internal Medicine
Male
Middle Aged
Netherlands
Predictive Value of Tests
Quality of Life
quality of life utility
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Reproducibility of Results
Severity of Illness Index
SF-6D
Surveys and Questionnaires
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
validity
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Background Utilities are often a main outcome parameter in economic evaluations. Because depression has a large influence on quality of life, it is expected that utilities are responsive to changes in depression. Objective To evaluate the change in utility derived from different instruments in depression, including the Short Form 6D (SF-6D), the Euroqol based on the UK (EQ-5DUK ), the Euroqol based on the Dutch tariff (EQ-5DNL ), and utilities derived from Beck Depression Inventory Second Edition (BDI-II) using the Depression-Free-Day method. Method This study evaluated the responsiveness, the minimally important difference, and the agreement in utility change derived from the different instruments. Results The SF-6D, EQ-5DUK , and EQ-5DNL were responsive. The minimally important difference values are in line with previous studies, about 0.3. The Depression-Free-Day method nearly always resulted in positive utility changes, even for subgroups that had no change or deterioration in health status or depression. There was poor agreement between utility changes of the SF-6D, EQ-5D (either EQ-5DUK or EQ-5DNL ), and DFDu. Conclusions The SF-6D, EQ-5DUK , and EQ-5DNL seem responsive and thus adequate for estimating utility in depression treatment. We do not recommend the use of the Depression-Fee-Day method. The low agreement between utility changes indicates that outcomes of the different instruments are incomparable.
ISSN:1098-3015
1524-4733
DOI:10.1016/j.jval.2010.12.004