Abstract
Purpose
It is not always possible to collect utility-based outcome data, like EQ-5D, needed for conducting economic evaluations in populations of older people. Sometimes, information on other non-utility outcome measures may have been collected. This paper examines the possibility of mapping the EQ-5D from a non-utility-based outcome, the Barthel index.
Methods
Data for 1,189 UK intermediate care patients were used. Ordinary least squares (OLS), censored least absolute deviations (CLAD) estimator and multinomial logistic (ML) models were used. The mean absolute error (MAE) and root-mean-squared error (RMSE) were used to estimate the predictive accuracy of eight regression models. Validation of primary models was carried out on random samples of data collected at admission and discharge.
Results
Models where the EQ-5D was entered as a continuous dependent variable and Barthel dimensions used as explanatory variables performed better. CLAD performed best on MAE and OLS on the RMSE, while the ML performed the worst on both measures. The CLAD predicted EQ-5D scores that matched the observed values more closely than the OLS.
Conclusions
It is possible to reasonably predict that the EQ-5D from the Barthel using regression methods and the CLAD model (4) is recommended.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Coast, J., Peters, T.J., Richards, S.H., Gunnell, D.J.: Use of the EuroQoL among elderly acute care patients. Qual. Life Res. 7, 1–10 (1998)
Brazier, J.E., Walters, S.J., Nicholl, J.P., Kohler, B.: Using the SF-36 and Euroqol on an elderly population. Qual. Life Res. 5, 195–204 (1996)
van Exel, N.J., Scholte op Reimer, W.J., Koopmanschap, M.A.: Assessment of post-stroke quality of life in cost-effectiveness studies: the usefulness of the Barthel index and the EuroQoL-5D. Qual. Life Res. 13, 427–433 (2004)
Miller, P., Gladman, J.R., Cunliffe, A.L., Husbands, S.L., Dewey, M.E., Harwood, R.H.: Economic analysis of an early discharge rehabilitation service for older people. Age Ageing 34, 274–280 (2005)
O’Reilly, J., Lowson, K., Young, J., Forster, A., Green, J., Small, N.: A cost effectiveness analysis within a randomised controlled trial of post-acute care of older people in a community hospital. BMJ 333, 228 (2006)
National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE): Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. NICE, London (2004)
Brazier, J., Deverill, M., Green, C., Harper, R., Booth, A.: A review of the use of health status measures in economic evaluation. Health Technol. Assess. 3, 1–164 (1999)
Froberg, D.G., Kane, R.L.: Methodology for measuring health-state preferences–I: measurement strategies. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 42, 345–354 (1989)
Payakachat, N., Summers, K.H., Pleil, A.M., Murawski, M.M., Thomas III, J., Jennings, K., et al.: Predicting EQ-5D utility scores from the 25-item national eye institute vision function questionnaire (NEI-VFQ 25) in patients with age-related macular degeneration. Qual. Life Res. 18, 801–813 (2009)
ICNET.: A national evaluation of the costs and outcomes of intermediate care for older people: final report. The University of Leicester, Leicester (2005)
Buxton, M.J., Lacey, L.A., Feagan, B.G., Niecko, T., Miller, D.W., Townsend, R.J.: Mapping from disease-specific measures to utility: an analysis of the relationships between the inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire and Crohn’s disease activity index in Crohn’s disease and measures of utility. Value Health 10, 214–220 (2007)
Kind, P., Dolan, P., Gudex, C., Williams, A.: Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. BMJ 316, 736–741 (1998)
Lyons, R.A., Crome, P., Monaghan, S., Killalea, D., Daley, J.A.: Health status and disability among elderly people in three UK districts. Age Ageing 26, 203–209 (1997)
van den Bos, G.A., Triemstra, A.H.: Quality of life as an instrument for need assessment and outcome assessment of health care in chronic patients. Qual. Health Care 8, 247–252 (1999)
Dolan, P.: Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med. Care 35, 1095–1108 (1997)
Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Tsuchiya, A., Busschbach, J.: A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Econ. 13, 873–884 (2004)
Kind, P., Hardman, G., Macran, S.: UK population norms for EQ-5D. Discussion paper 172. Centre for Health Economics, University of York (1999)
Murphy, R., Sackley, C.M., Miller, P., Harwood, R.H.: Effect of experience of severe stroke on subjective valuations of quality of life after stroke. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatr. 70, 679–681 (2001)
Post, P.N., Stiggelbout, A.M., Wakker, P.P.: The utility of health states after stroke: a systematic review of the literature. Stroke 32, 1425–1429 (2001)
Sainsbury, A., Seebass, G., Bansal, A., Young, J.B.: Reliability of the Barthel index when used with older people. Age Ageing 34, 228–232 (2005)
Wilkinson, P.R., Wolfe, C.D., Warburton, F.G., Rudd, A.G., Howard, R.S., Ross-Russell, R.W., et al.: Longer term quality of life and outcome in stroke patients: is the Barthel index alone an adequate measure of outcome? Qual. Health Care 6, 125–130 (1997)
Minosso, J.S.M., Amendola, F., Alvarenga, M.R.M., de Campos Oliveira, M.A.: Validation of the Barthel index in elderly patients attended in outpatient clinics, in Brazil. Acta Paul. Enferm. 23, 218–223 (2010)
Mahoney, F.I., Barthel, D.: Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Md. State Med. J. 14, 61–65 (1965)
Wolfe, C.D., Taub, N.A., Woodrow, E.J., Burney, P.G.: Assessment of scales of disability and handicap for stroke patients. Stroke 22, 1242–1244 (1991)
Shah, S., Vanclay, F., Cooper, B.: Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel index for stroke rehabilitation. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 42, 703–709 (1989)
Wade, D.T., Collin, C.: The Barthel ADL index: a standard measure of physical disability? Int. Disabil. Stud. 10, 64–67 (1988)
Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Deverill, M.: The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J. Health Econ. 21, 271–292 (2002)
Busschbach, J.J., McDonnell, J., Essink-Bot, M.L., van Hout, B.A.: Estimating parametric relationships between health description and health valuation with an application to the EuroQol EQ-5D. J. Health Econ. 18, 551–571 (1999)
Chay, K.Y., Powell, J.L.: Semiparametric censored regression models. J. Econ. Perspect. 15, 29–42 (2001)
Powell, J.L.: Least absolute deviations estimation for the censored regression model. J. Econ. 25, 303–325 (1984)
Arabmazar, A., Schmidt, P.: Further evidence on the robustness of the Tobit estimator to heteroskedasticity. J. Econ. 17, 253–258 (1981)
Vivverberg, W.: Non-normality as distributional misspecification in single-equation limited dependent variable models. Oxf. Bull. Econ Stat. 49, 417–430 (1987)
Huang, I.C., Frangakis, C., Atkinson, M.J., Willke, R.J., Leite, W.L., Vogel, W.B., et al.: Addressing ceiling effects in health status measures: a comparison of techniques applied to measures for people with HIV disease. Health Serv. Res. 43, 327–339 (2008)
Johnston, J.: Econometric methods. McGraw-Hill, New York (1997)
Gray, A.M., Rivero-Arias, O., Clarke, P.M.: Estimating the association between SF-12 responses and EQ-5D utility values by response mapping. Med. Decis. Mak. 26, 18–29 (2006)
Long, S.: Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Advanced quantitative techniques in the social sciences 7. Sage Publications, London (1997)
Green, W.H.: Econometric analysis. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1997)
Brazier, J.E., Yang, Y., Tsuchiya, A., Rowen, D.L.: A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures. Eur. J. Health Econ. 11, 215–225 (2010)
McCullagh, P., Nelder, J.A.: Generalized linear models. Chapman and Hall, London (1989)
Bansback, N., Marra, C., Tsuchiya, A., Anis, A., Guh, D., Hammond, T., et al.: Using the health assessment questionnaire to estimate preference-based single indices in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthr Rheum. 57, 963–971 (2007)
Kennedy, C. E., Aoki, N.: Generating a mortality model from a pediatric ICU (PICU) database utilizing knowledge discovery. Proc. AMIA Symp. 375–379 (2002)
Daniel, W.W., Terrell, J.C.: Business statistics. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston (1995)
Hyndman, R.J., Koehler, A.B.: Another look at measures of forecast accuracy. Int. J. Forecast. 22, 679–688 (2006)
Altman, D.: Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman and Hall, London (1991)
Cheung, Y.B., Thumboo, J., Gao, F., Ng, G.Y., Pang, G., Koo, W.H., et al.: Mapping the english and chinese versions of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-general to the EQ-5D utility index. Value Health 12, 371–376 (2009)
Dobrez, D., Cella, D., Pickard, A.S., Lai, J.S., Nickolov, A.: Estimation of patient preference-based utility weights from the functional assessment of cancer therapy—general. Value Health 10, 266–272 (2007)
StataCorp, L.P.: Intercooled stata 10.1 for windows. TX, College Station (2009)
Sengupta, N., Nichol, M.B., Wu, J., Globe, D.: Mapping the SF-12 to the HUI3 and VAS in a managed care population. Med. Care 42, 927–937 (2004)
Cheung, Y.B., Tan, L.C., Lau, P.N., Au, W.L., Luo, N.: Mapping the eight-item Parkinson’s disease questionnaire (PDQ-8) to the EQ-5D utility index. Qual. Life Res. 17, 1173–1181 (2008)
Sullivan, P.W., Ghushchyan, V.: Mapping the EQ-5D index from the SF-12: US general population preferences in a nationally representative sample. Med. Decis. Mak. 26, 401–409 (2006)
Clarke, P., Gray, A., Holman, R.: Estimating utility values for health states of type 2 diabetic patients using the EQ-5D (UKPDS 62). Med. Decis. Mak. 22, 340–349 (2002)
Hilari, K., Owen, S., Farrelly, S.J.: Proxy and self-report agreement on the stroke and aphasia quality of life scale-39. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatr. 78, 1072–1075 (2007)
Muus, I., Petzold, M., Ringsberg, K.C.: Health-related quality of life after stroke: reliability of proxy responses. Clin. Nurs. Res. 18, 103–118 (2009)
Ostbye, T., Tyas, S., McDowell, I., Koval, J.: Reported activities of daily living: agreement between elderly subjects with and without dementia and their caregivers. Age Ageing 26, 99–106 (1997)
Hung, S.Y., Pickard, A.S., Witt, W.P., Lambert, B.L.: Pain and depression in caregivers affected their perception of pain in stroke patients. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 60, 963–970 (2007)
Long, K., Sudha, S., Mutran, E.J.: Elder-proxy agreement concerning the functional status and medical history of the older person: the impact of caregiver burden and depressive symptomatology. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 46, 1103–1111 (1998)
Novella, J.L., Boyer, F., Jochum, C., Jovenin, N., Morrone, I., Jolly, D., et al.: Health status in patients with Alzheimer’s disease: an investigation of inter-rater agreement. Qual. Life Res. 15, 811–819 (2006)
Brazier, J.E., Yang, Y., Tsuchiya, A., Rowen, D.L.: A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures. Eur. J. Health Econ. 11, 215–225 (2010)
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to colleagues from the Universities of Birmingham and Leicester (the ICNET team) who participated in the National Evaluation of Intermediate Care Services from which data used in this study were obtained. We are also thankful to the intermediate care-coordinators and the staff from the case study sites that provided the quantitative data and clarified follow-up questions. Special thanks go to participants at the UK Health Economists Study Group meeting held at the University of York in July 2006 for comments on an earlier iteration of this work. The National Evaluation was funded by the Department of Health (Policy Research Programme) and the Medical Research Council. The funders were not involved in the study design, in the writing of the manuscript or in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kaambwa, B., Billingham, L. & Bryan, S. Mapping utility scores from the Barthel index. Eur J Health Econ 14, 231–241 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-011-0364-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-011-0364-5