The English and Chinese versions of the five-level EuroQoL Group's five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D) were valid and reliable and provided comparable scores in Asian breast cancer patients

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Chun Fan Lee (1) (2) (7)
  Raymond Ng (3)
  Nan Luo (4)
  Nan Soon Wong (3)
  Yoon Sim Yap (3)
  Soo Kien Lo (3)
  Whay Kuang Chia (3)
  Alethea Yee (5)
  Lalit Krishna (5)
  Celest Wong (1)
  Cynthia Goh (5)
  Yin Bun Cheung (1) (2) (6)
  
• 关键词：Breast cancer ; EQ ; 5D ; FACT ; B ; Measurement properties ; Utility index ; VAS
• 刊名：Supportive Care in Cancer
• 出版年：2013
• 出版时间：January 2013
• 年：2013
• 卷：21
• 期：1
• 页码：201-209
• 全文大小：232KB
• 参考文献：1. Axelsson B, Sjoden PO (1999) Assessment of quality of life in palliative care: psychometric properties of a short questionnaire. Acta Oncol 38:229-37 CrossRef
  2. Ballatori E (2001) Unsolved problems in evaluating the quality of life of cancer patients. Ann Oncol 12(Suppl 3):S11–S13 CrossRef
  3. Kopec JA, Willison KD (2003) A comparative review of four preference-weighted measures of health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 56:317-25 CrossRef
  4. Barton GR, Sach TH, Jenkinson C et al (2008) Do estimates of cost-utility based on the EQ-5D differ from those based on the mapping of utility scores? Health Qual Life Outcomes 6:51 CrossRef
  5. Janssen MF, Birnie E, Haagsma JA, Bonsel GJ (2008) Comparing the standard EQ-5D three-level system with a five-level version. Value Health 11:275-84 CrossRef
  6. Janssen MF, Birnie E, Bonsel GJ (2008) Quantification of the level descriptors for the standard EQ-5D three-level system and a five-level version according to two methods. Qual Life Res 17:463-73 CrossRef
  7. Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, et al. (2011) Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res 20:1727-736 CrossRef
  8. Sullivan PW, Ghushchyan V (2006) Preference-based EQ-5D index scores for chronic conditions in the United States. Med Decis Making 26:410-20 CrossRef
  9. Gao F, Ng GY, Cheung YB et al (2009) The Singaporean English and Chinese versions of the EQ-5D achieved measurement equivalence in cancer patients. J Clin Epidemiol 62:206-13 CrossRef
  10. Graddol D (2004) The future of language. Science 303:1329-331 CrossRef
  11. Brady M, Cella D, Mo F et al (1997) Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast quality-of-life instrument. J Clinic Oncol 15:974-86
  12. Wan C, Zhang D, Yang Z et al (2007) Validation of the simplified Chinese version of the FACT-B for measuring quality of life for patients with breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 106:413-18 CrossRef
  13. Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC et al (1982) Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol 5:649-55 CrossRef
  14. Cheung YB, Goh C, Thumboo J et al (2005) Variability and sample size requirements of quality-of-life measures: a randomized study of three major questionnaires. JCO 23:4936-944 CrossRef
  15. Blagden SP, Charman SC, Sharples LD et al (2003) Performance status score: do patients and their oncologists agree? Br J Cancer 89:1022-027 CrossRef
  16. Pickard AS, Kohlmann T, Janssen MF et al (2007) Evaluating equivalency between response systems application of the Rasch model to a 3-level and 5-level EQ-5D. Med Care 45:812-19 CrossRef
  17. Luo N, Li MH, Liu GG, Lloyd A, de Charro F, Herdman M (2012) Developing the Chinese version of the new 5-level EQ-5D descriptive system: the response scaling approach. Qual Life Res. doi:10.1007/s11136-012-0200-0
  18. Rabin R, Oemar M, Oppe M, et al. (2011) EQ-5D-5L user guide: basic information on how to use the EQ-5D-5L instrument. EuroQoL Group. Available at http://www.euroqol.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Documenten/PDF/Folders_Flyers/UserGuide_EQ-5D-5L.pdf; assessed 2 Jul 2011
  19. Tsuchiya A, Ikeda S, Ikegami N et al (2002) Estimating an EQ-5D population value set: the case of Japan. Health Econ 11:341-53 CrossRef
  20. Ng R, Lee CF, Wong NS, et al. (2012) Measurement properties of the English and Chinese versions of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) in Asian breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 131:619-25 CrossRef
  21. Cella D (1997) FACIT Manual: manual of the functional assessment of chronic illness therapy (FACIT) measurement system. Evanston, IL, CORE
  22. Cuzick JA (1985) Wilcoxon-type test for trend. Stat Med 4:87-0 CrossRef
  23. Senn S (1997) Statistical issues in drug development. Chichester, UK: Wiley; 320
  24. Cheung YB, Thumboo J, Goh C et al (2004) The equivalence and difference between the English and Chinese versions of two major cancer-specific health-related quality of life questionnaires. Cancer 101:2874-880 CrossRef
  25. Cheung YB (2007) A modified least-squares regression approach to the estimation of risk difference. Am J Epidemiol 166:1337-344 CrossRef
  26. Luo N, Chew LH, Fong KY et al (2003) Do English and Chinese EQ-5D versions demonstrate measurement equivalence? Health Qual Life Outcomes 1:7 CrossRef
  27. McNamee R (2005) Regression modelling and other methods to control confounding. Occup Environ Med 62:500-06 CrossRef
  28. Pickard AS, De Leon MC, Kohlmann T et al (2007) Psychometric comparison of the standard EQ-5D to a 5 level version in cancer patients. Med Care 45:259-63 CrossRef
  29. Mehta CR, Patel NR (1983) A network algorithm for performing Fisher's exact test in r?×?c contingency tables. JASA 78:427-34
  
• 作者单位：Chun Fan Lee (1) (2) (7)
  Raymond Ng (3)
  Nan Luo (4)
  Nan Soon Wong (3)
  Yoon Sim Yap (3)
  Soo Kien Lo (3)
  Whay Kuang Chia (3)
  Alethea Yee (5)
  Lalit Krishna (5)
  Celest Wong (1)
  Cynthia Goh (5)
  Yin Bun Cheung (1) (2) (6)
  
  1. Center for Quantitative Medicine, Office of Clinical Sciences, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
  2. Department of Biostatistics, Singapore Clinical Research Institute, Singapore, Singapore
  7. Singapore Clinical Research Institute, 31 Biopolis Way Nanos #02-01, Singapore, 138669, Singapore
  3. Department of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center, Singapore, Singapore
  4. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health & Centre for Health Services Research, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
  5. Department of Palliative Medicine, National Cancer Center, Singapore, Singapore
  6. Department of International Health, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland
  
• ISSN：1433-7339

文摘

Objective To examine the measurement properties of and comparability between the English and Chinese versions of the five-level EuroQoL Group’s five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D) in breast cancer patients in Singapore. Methods This is an observational study of 269 patients. Known-group validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D utility index and visual analog scale (VAS) were assessed in relation to various clinical characteristics and longitudinal change in performance status, respectively. Convergent and divergent validity was examined by correlation coefficients between the EQ-5D and a breast cancer-specific instrument. Test–retest reliability was evaluated. The two language versions were compared by multiple regression analyses. Results For both English and Chinese versions, the EQ-5D utility index and VAS demonstrated known-group validity and convergent and divergent validity, and presented sufficient test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation--.72 to 0.83). The English version was responsive to changes in performance status. The Chinese version was responsive to decline in performance status, but there was no conclusive evidence about its responsiveness to improvement in performance status. In the comparison analyses of the utility index and VAS between the two language versions, borderline results were obtained, and equivalence cannot be definitely confirmed. Conclusion The five-level EQ-5D is valid, responsive, and reliable in assessing health outcome of breast cancer patients. The English and Chinese versions provide comparable measurement results.