Estimating an EQ-5D value set for Malaysia using time trade-off and visual analogue scale methods.

OBJECTIVES To estimate a EQ-5D value set for Malaysia by using time trade-off (TTO) and visual analogue scale (VAS) valuation methods. METHODS TTO and VAS valuations were obtained from face-to-face surveys of a convenience sample of patients, caregivers, and health professionals conducted at nine government hospitals in 2004 and 2005. Forty-five EQ-5D questionnaire health states were valued, divided into five sets of 15 health states. Analysis was conducted by using linear additive regression models applying N3 and D1 specifications. Model selection was based on criteria of coefficient properties, statistical significance, and goodness of fit. RESULTS One hundred fifty-two respondents were interviewed, yielding 2174 TTO and 2265 VAS valuations. Respondents found TTO valuations to be more difficult than VAS valuations, and there were more inconsistencies in TTO valuations. All the independent variables in the models were statistically significant and consistent with expected signs and magnitude, except for the D1 specification modeled on TTO valuations. The N3 model provided the best fit for the VAS valuation data, with a mean absolute error of 0.032. CONCLUSION This study provides a Malaysian EQ-5D questionnaire value set that can be used for cost-utility studies despite survey limitations.

[1]  Afschin Gandjour,et al.  Theoretical Foundation of Patient v. Population Preferences in Calculating QALYs , 2010, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

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

[3]  A. Williams EuroQol : a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life , 1990 .

[4]  H. Jamaiyah,et al.  The validation of the EQ-5D in Malaysian dialysis patients. , 2010, The Medical journal of Malaysia.

[5]  O. Norheim,et al.  Quantifying quality of life for economic analysis: time out for time trade off , 2003, Medical humanities.

[6]  Paul Kind,et al.  Logical inconsistencies in survey respondents' health state valuations -- a methodological challenge for estimating social tariffs. , 2003, Health economics.

[7]  Wan Ariffin Bin Abdullah,et al.  Med J Malaysia , 2001 .

[8]  Liang Li,et al.  Some methodological issues with the analysis of preference-based EQ-5D index score , 2009, Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology.

[9]  P. Dolan,et al.  The effect of past and present illness experience on the valuations of health states. , 1995, Medical care.

[10]  D. Street,et al.  International comparisons in valuing EQ-5D health states: a review and analysis. , 2009, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[11]  Nan Luo,et al.  Validity, feasibility and acceptability of time trade-off and standard gamble assessments in health valuation studies: a study in a multiethnic Asian population in Singapore. , 2008, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[12]  M. Jo,et al.  Estimating quality weights for EQ-5D health states with the time trade-off method in South Korea. , 2008, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[13]  Paul Kind,et al.  South Korean time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states: modeling with observed values for 101 health states. , 2009, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[14]  M. Gold Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine , 2016 .

[15]  Nancy Devlin,et al.  Guidance to users of EQ-5D value sets , 2007 .

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

[17]  Paul Kind,et al.  How do Zimbabweans value health states? , 2003, Population health metrics.

[18]  R. Willke,et al.  Good research practices for cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials: the ISPOR RCT-CEA Task Force report. , 2005, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[19]  N. Ikegami,et al.  Estimating an EQ-5D population value set: the case of Japan. , 2002, Health economics.

[20]  Milton C Weinstein,et al.  Comparison of Health State Utilities Using Community and Patient Preference Weights Derived from a Survey of Patients with HIV/AIDS , 2002, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[21]  P. Dolan Whose Preferences Count? , 1999, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[22]  Nan Luo,et al.  Valuations of EQ-5D Health States: Are the United States and United Kingdom Different? , 2005, Medical care.

[23]  Mark Oppe,et al.  EQ-5D value sets : inventory, comparative review, and user guide , 2007 .