The Indonesian EQ-5D-5L Value Set

BackgroundThe EQ-5D is one of the most used generic health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) instruments worldwide. To make the EQ-5D suitable for use in economic evaluations, a societal-based value set is needed. Indonesia does not have such a value set.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to derive an EQ-5D-5L value set from the Indonesian general population.MethodsA representative sample aged 17 years and over was recruited from the Indonesian general population. A multi-stage stratified quota method with respect to residence, gender, age, level of education, religion and ethnicity was utilized. Two elicitation techniques, the composite time trade-off (C-TTO) and discrete choice experiments (DCE) were applied. Interviews were undertaken by trained interviewers using computer-assisted face-to-face interviews with the EuroQol Valuation Technology (EQ-VT) platform. To estimate the value set, a hybrid regression model combining C-TTO and DCE data was used.ResultsA total of 1054 respondents who completed the interview formed the sample for the analysis. Their characteristics were similar to those of the Indonesian population. Most self-reported health problems were observed in the pain/discomfort dimension (39.66%) and least in the self-care dimension (1.89%). In the value set, the maximum value was 1.000 for full health (health state ‘11111’) followed by the health state ‘11112’ with value 0.921. The minimum value was −0.865 for the worst state (‘55555’). Preference values were most affected by mobility and least by pain/discomfort.ConclusionsWe now have a representative EQ-5D-5L value set for Indonesia. We expect our results will promote and facilitate health economic evaluations and HRQOL research in Indonesia.

[1]  S. Hawkins,et al.  Information Processing Strategies in Riskless Preference Reversals: The Prominence Effect , 1994 .

[2]  C. Gudex,et al.  From translation to version management: a history and review of methods for the cultural adaptation of the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire. , 2014, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[3]  Stephen Joel Coons,et al.  US Valuation of the EQ-5D Health States: Development and Testing of the D1 Valuation Model , 2005, Medical care.

[4]  Mark Oppe,et al.  Discrete choice modeling for the quantification of health states: the case of the EQ-5D. , 2010, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[5]  K. Mohammad,et al.  Population-Based Preference Weights for the EQ-5D Health States Using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) in Iran , 2016, Iranian Red Crescent medical journal.

[6]  A. Riewpaiboon,et al.  Evaluation of Health-Related Quality of Life among Patients with Cervical Cancer in Indonesia. , 2015, Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP.

[7]  W. Brouwer,et al.  Lead time TTO: leading to better health state valuations? , 2013, Health economics.

[8]  R. Brooks.  EuroQol: the current state of play. , 1996, Health policy.

[9]  J. Richardson,et al.  Comparing and Explaining Differences in the Magnitude, Content, and Sensitivity of Utilities Predicted by the EQ-5D, SF-6D, HUI 3, 15D, QWB, and AQoL-8D Multiattribute Utility Instruments , 2015, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[10]  N. Bansback,et al.  A Time Trade-off-derived Value Set of the EQ-5D-5L for Canada , 2015, Medical care.

[11]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Culture and social support. , 2008, The American psychologist.

[12]  Kevin A. Rader,et al.  The EQ-5D-5L Improves on the EQ-5D-3L for Health-related Quality-of-life Assessment in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty , 2015, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[13]  Mark Oppe,et al.  A program of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. , 2014, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[14]  M. Essink‐bot,et al.  Estimating parametric relationships between health description and health valuation with an application to the EuroQol EQ-5D. , 1999, Journal of health economics.

[15]  P. Sakthong.  Measurement of clinical-effect: utility. , 2008, Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet.

[16]  Ayse K. Uskul,et al.  Self-Construal and Concerns Elicited by Imagined and Real Health Problems , 2007 .

[17]  Michael Herdman,et al.  Dealing with the health state ‘dead’ when using discrete choice experiments to obtain values for EQ-5D-5L heath states , 2013, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[18]  Markus Lahtinen,et al.  Comparing the EQ-5D 3L and 5L: measurement properties and association with chronic conditions and multimorbidity in the general population , 2014, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes.

[19]  R. van Crevel,et al.  Severity of psychiatric and physical problems is associated with lower quality of life in methadone patients in Indonesia. , 2013, The American journal on addictions.

[20]  Brendan Mulhern,et al.  Valuing health‐related quality of life: An EQ‐5D‐5L value set for England , 2017, Health economics.

[21]  G. Bonsel,et al.  Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) , 2011, Quality of Life Research.

[22]  Anthony J Culyer,et al.  National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[23]  Juan Manuel Ramos-Goñi,et al.  An EQ-5D-5L value set based on Uruguayan population preferences , 2016, Quality of Life Research.

[24]  Mark Oppe,et al.  Valuation and Modeling of EQ-5D-5L Health States Using a Hybrid Approach , 2014, Medical care.

[25]  J. L. Pinto,et al.  Loss aversion and scale compatibility in two-attribute trade-offs , 2002 .

[26]  Mark Oppe,et al.  Quality Control Process for EQ-5D-5L Valuation Studies. , 2017, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[27]  J. Richardson,et al.  Mapping between 6 Multiattribute Utility Instruments , 2016, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[28]  J. Richardson,et al.  Why do multi-attribute utility instruments produce different utilities: the relative importance of the descriptive systems, scale and ‘micro-utility’ effects , 2015, Quality of Life Research.

[29]  P. Dolan,et al.  Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. , 1997, Medical care.

[30]  Mark Oppe,et al.  EuroQol Protocols for Time Trade-Off Valuation of Health Outcomes , 2016, PharmacoEconomics.

[31]  Takashi Fukuda,et al.  Developing a Japanese version of the EQ-5D-5L value set , 2015 .

[32]  A. Pickard,et al.  Comparing responsiveness of the EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS in stroke patients , 2014, Quality of Life Research.

[33]  M. Thavorncharoensap,et al.  Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to EQ-5D-3L in the Thai diabetes patients , 2015, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes.

[34]  G Ardine de Wit,et al.  Dutch Tariff for the Five-Level Version of EQ-5D. , 2016, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[35]  M. Herdman,et al.  Assessing the health of the general population in England: how do the three- and five-level versions of EQ-5D compare? , 2015, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes.

[36]  J. Thumboo,et al.  Valuation of EQ-5D-3L Health States in Singapore: Modeling of Time Trade-Off Values for 80 Empirically Observed Health States , 2014, PharmacoEconomics.

[37]  Nan Luo,et al.  The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Korea , 2016, Quality of Life Research.

[38]  D. Marshall,et al.  Reliability and validity of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L in patients with osteoarthritis referred for hip and knee replacement , 2015, Quality of Life Research.

[39]  S. Wilson.  Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes , 1987 .

[40]  Jan Passchier,et al.  Employing quality control and feedback to the EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol to improve the quality of data collection , 2016, Quality of Life Research.

[41]  Grazyna Adamiak,et al.  Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes, 3rd ed , 2006 .