Health-related quality of life and socioeconomic status: inequalities among adults with a chronic disease

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Reiner Leidl¹  Martin Vogelmann³  Andreas Mielck² 

[1] Munich Center of Health Sciences, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany;Helmholtz Zentrum Muenchen, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Institute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, Neuherberg D-85758, PO Box 1129, Germany;Wort & Bild Verlag, Konradshöhe GmbH & Co. KG, Baierbrunn, Germany

关键词: Germany;    Health inequalities;    Socioeconomic status;    Chronic disease;    L;    EQ-5D-3 ;   

Others  :  814926
DOI  :  10.1186/1477-7525-12-58

 received in 2013-09-25, accepted in 2014-04-17,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

A number of studies have shown an association between health-related quality of life (HRQL) and socioeconomic status (SES). Indicators of SES usually serve as potential confounders; associations between SES and HRQL are rarely discussed in their own right. Also, few studies assess the association between HRQL and SES among those with a chronic disease. The study focuses on the question of whether people with the same state of health judge their HRQL differently according to their SES, and whether a bias could be introduced by ignoring these differences.

Methods

The analyses were based on a representative sample of the adult population in Germany (n = 11,177). HRQL was assessed by the EQ-5D-3 L, i.e. the five domains (e.g. ‘moderate or severe problems’ concerning mobility) and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). SES was primarily assessed by educational level; age, sex and family status were included as potential confounders. Six chronic diseases were selected, each having a prevalence of at least 1% (e.g. diabetes mellitus). Multivariate analyses were conducted by logistic and linear regression.

Results

Among adults with a chronic disease, most ‘moderate or severe problems’ are reported more often in the low (compared with the high) educational group. The same social differences are seen for VAS values, also in subgroups characterized by ‘moderate or severe problems’. Gender-specific analyses show that for women the associations with VAS values can just be seen in the total sample. For men, however, they are also present in subgroups defined by ‘moderate or severe problems’ or by the presence of a chronic disease; some of these differences exceed 10 points on the VAS scale.

Conclusions

Low SES groups seem to be faced with a double burden: first, increased levels of health impairments and, second, lower levels of valuated HRQL once health is impaired. These associations should be analysed and discussed in their own right, based on interdisciplinary co-operation. Social epidemiologists could include measures of HRQL in their studies more often, for example, and health economists could consider assessing whether recommendations based on HRQL scales might include a social bias.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Mielck et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]EuroQol Group Executive Office. Rotterdam, The Netherlands; (http://www.euroqol.org webcite) (last access: April 23, 2014)
• [2]Mielck A, Reitmeir P, Vogelmann M, Leidl R: Impact of educational level on health-related quality of life (HRQL): results from Germany based on the EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D). Eur J Public Health 2013, 23(1):45-49.
• [3]Franks P, Lubetkin EI, Melnikow J: Do personal and societal preferences differ by socio-demographic group? Health Econ 2007, 16:319-325.
• [4]Jia H, Zack MM, Moriarty DG, Fryback DG: Predicting the EuroQol group’s EQ-5D index from CDC’s “Healthy Days” in a US sample. Med Decis Making 2011, 31:174-185.
• [5]Luo N, Johnson JA, Shaw JW, Feeny D, Coons SJ: Self-reported health status of the general adult U.S. population as assessed by the EQ-5D and Health Utilities Index. Med Care 2005, 43(11):1078-1086.
• [6]Sullivan PW, Ghushchyan V: Preference-based EQ-5D index scores for chronic conditions in the United States. Med Decis Making 2006, 26:410-420.
• [7]Devlin N, Hansen P, Herbison P: Variations in self-reported health status: results from a New Zealand survey. N Z Med J 2000, 113(1123):517-520.
• [8]Asada Y, Ohkusa Y: Analysis of health-related quality of life (HRQL), its distribution, and its distribution by income in Japan, 1989 and 1998. Soc Sci Med 2004, 59(7):1423-1433.
• [9]Wang HM, Patrick DL, Edwards TC, Skalicky AM, Zeng HY, Gu WW: Validation of the EQ-5D in a general population sample in urban China. Qual Life Res 2012, 21(1):155-160.
• [10]Barton GR, Sach TH, Avery AJ, Jenkinson C, Doherty M, Whynes DK, Muir KR: A comparison of the performance of the EQ-5D and SF-6D for individuals aged ≥ 45 years. Health Econ 2008, 17:815-832.
• [11]Breeze E, Jones DA, Wilkinson P, Bulpitt CJ, Grundy C, Latif AM, Fletcher AE: Area deprivation, social class, and quality of life among people aged 75 years and over in Britain. Int J Epidemiol 2005, 34(2):276-283.
• [12]Kind P, Dolan P, Gudex C, Williams A: Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. BMJ 1998, 316:736-741.
• [13]Macran S, Weatherly H, Kind P: Measuring population health: a comparison of three generic health status measures. Med Care 2003, 41(2):218-231.
• [14]Burström K, Johannesson M, Diderichsen F: Increasing socio-economic inequalities in life expectancy and QALYs in Sweden 1980–1997. Health Econ 2005, 14:831-850.
• [15]Regidor E, Barrio G, de la Fuente L, Domingo A, Rodriguez C, Alonso J: Association between educational level and health related quality of life in Spanish adults. J Epidemiol Community Health 1999, 53:75-82.
• [16]Cunillera O, Tresserras R, Rajmil L, Vilagut G, Brugulat P, Herdman M, Mompart A, Medina A, Pardo Y, Alonso J, Brazier J, Ferrer M: Discriminative capacity of the EQ-5D, SF-6D, and SF-12 as measures of health status in population health survey. Qual Life Res 2010, 19(6):853-864.
• [17]Kontodimopoulos N, Pappa E, Papadopoulos AA, Tountas Y, Niakas D: Comparing SF-6D and EQ-5D utilities across groups differing in health status. Qual Life Res 2009, 18(1):87-97.
• [18]Pappa E, Kontodimopoulos N, Papadopoulos AA, Niakas D: Assessing the socio-economic and demographic impact on health-related quality of life: evidence from Greece. Int J Public Health 2009, 54(4):241-249.
• [19]Gundgaard J, Lauridsen J: A decomposition of income-related health inequality applied to EQ-5D. Eur J Health Econ 2006, 7:231-237.
• [20]Sørensen J, Davidsen M, Gudex C, Pedersen KM, Brønnum-Hansen H: Danish EQ-5D population norms. Scand J Public Health 2009, 37:467-474.
• [21]Hoeymans N, van Lindert H, Westert GP: The health status of the Dutch population as assessed by the EQ-6D. Qual Life Res 2005, 14:655-663.
• [22]Bernert S, Fernández A, Haro JM, König HH, Alonso J, Vilagut G, Sevilla-Dedieu C, de Graaf R, Matschinger H, Heider D, Angermeyer MC: ESEMeD/MHEDEA 2000 investigators: comparison of different valuation methods for population health status measured by the EQ-5D in three European countries. Value Health 2009, 12(5):750-758.
• [23]König HH, Bernert S, Angermeyer MC, Matschinger H, Martinez M, Vilagut G, Haro JM, de Girolamo G, de Graaf R, Kovess V, Alonso J, ESEMeD/MHEDEA 2000 Investigators: Comparison of population health status in six European countries: results of a representative survey using the EQ-5D questionnaire. Med Care 2009, 47(2):255-261.
• [24]König HH, Heider D, Lehnert T: Health status of the advanced elderly in six European countries: results from a representative survey using EQ-5D and SF-12. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2010, 8:143.
• [25]Maheswaran H, Petrou S, Rees K, Stranges S: Estimating EQ-5D utility values for major health behavioural risk factors in England. J Epidemiol Community Health 2013, 67(2):172-180.
• [26]Grandy S, Fox KM: EQ-5D visual analog scale and utility index values in individuals with diabetes and at risk for diabetes: findings from the study to help improve early evaluation and management of risk factors leading to diabetes SHIELD). Health Qual Life Outcomes 2008, 6:18. BioMed Central Full Text
• [27]Lubetkin EI, Jia H, Franks P, Gold MR: Relationship among sociodemographic factors, clinical conditions, and health-related quality of life: examining the EQ-5D in the U.S. general population. Qual Life Res 2005, 14:2187-2196.
• [28]Burström K, Johannesson M, Diderichsen F: Swedish population health-related quality of life results using the EQ-5D. Qual Life Res 2001, 10:621-635.
• [29]Saarni SI, Härkänen T, Sintonen H, Suvisaari J, Koskinen S, Aromaa A, Lönnqvist J: The impact of 29 chronic conditions on health-related quality of life: a general population survey in Finland using 15D and EQ-5D. Qual Life Res 2006, 15(8):1403-1414.
• [30]Wang HM, Beyer M, Gensichen J, Gerlach FM: Health-related quality of life among general practice patients with differing chronic diseases in Germany: cross sectional survey. BMC Public Health 2008, 8:246. BioMed Central Full Text
• [31]Heyworth IT, Hazell ML, Linehan MF, Frank TL: How do common chronic conditions affect health-related quality of life? Br J Gen Pract 2009, 59:353-358.
• [32]Sullivan PW, Ghushchyan VH, Bayliss EA: The impact of co-morbidity burden on preference-based health-related quality of life in the United States. Pharmacoeconomics 2012, 30(5):431-442.
• [33]Nyman JA, Barleen NA, Dowd BE, Russell DW, Coons SJ, Sullivan PW: Quality-of-life weights for the US population: self-reported health status and priority health conditions, by demographic characteristics. Med Care 2007, 45:618-628.
• [34]Lacey EA, Walters SJ: Continuing inequality: gender and social class influences on self perceived health after a heart attack. J Epidemiol Community Health 2003, 57(8):622-627.
• [35]Schweikert B, Hunger M, Meisinger C, König HH, Gapp O, Holle R: Quality of life several years after myocardial infarction: comparing the MONICA/KORA registry to the general population. Eur Heart J 2009, 30(4):436-443.
• [36]Wexler DJ, Grant RW, Wittenberg E, Bosch JL, Cagliero E, Delahanty L, Blais MA, Meigs JB: Correlates of health-related quality of life in type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia 2006, 49(7):1489-1497.
• [37]Delpierre C, Kelly-Irving M, Munch-Petersen M, Lauwers-Cances V, Datta GD, Lepage B, Lang T: SRH and HrQOL: does social position impact differently on their link with health status? BMC Public Health 2012, 12:19. BioMed Central Full Text
• [38]Miravitlles M, Naberan K, Cantoni J, Azpeitia A: Socioeconomic status and health-related quality of life of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Respiration 2011, 82(5):402-408.
• [39]Sobocki P, Ekman M, Agren H, Krakau I, Runeson B, Mårtensson B, Jönsson B: Health-related quality of life measured with EQ-5D in patients treated for depression in primary care. Value Health 2007, 10(2):153-160.
• [40]Kontodimopoulos N, Argiriou M, Theakos N, Niakas D: The impact of disease severity on EQ-5D and SF-6D utility discrepancies in chronic heart failure. Eur J Health Econ 2011, 12(4):383-391.
• [41]Denvir MA, Lee AJ, Rysdale J, Walker A, Eteiba H, Starkey IR, Pell JP: Influence of socioeconomic status on clinical outcomes and quality of life after percutaneous coronary intervention. J Epidemiol Community Health 2006, 60(12):1085-1088.
• [42]Burström K, Johannesson M, Diderichsen F: Health-related quality of life by disease and socio-economic group in the general population in Sweden. Health Policy 2001, 55(1):51-69.
• [43]Stafford M, Soljak M, Pledge V, Mindell J: Socio-economic differences in the health-related quality of life impact of cardiovascular conditions. Eur J Public Health 2012, 22(3):301-305.
• [44]Jerant A, Chapman BP, Franks P: Personality and EQ-5D scores among individuals with chronic conditions. Qual Life Res 2008, 17:1195-1204.
• [45]Mielck A, Vogelmann M, Schweikert B, Leidl R: Gesundheitszustand bei Erwachsenen in Deutschland: Ergebnisse einer repräsentativen Befragung mit dem EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D) [Health Status of Adults in Germany: Results from a Representative Survey using the EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D)]. Gesundheitswesen 2010, 72:476-486.
• [46]Leidl R, Reitmeir P: A value set for the EQ-5D based on experienced health states: Development and testing for the German population. Pharmacoeconomics 2011, 29(6):521-534.
• [47]Statistisches Bundesamt, Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung: Datenreport 2011. Bonn; 2011. data report 2001
• [48]Rietveld CA, Medland SE, Derringer J, Yang J, Esko T, Martin NW, Westra HJ, Shakhbazov K, Abdellaoui A, Agrawal A, Albrecht E, Alizadeh BZ, Amin N, Barnard J, Baumeister SE, Benke KS, Bielak LF, Boatman JA, Boyle PA, Davies G, de Leeuw C, Eklund N, Evans DS, Ferhmann R, Fischer K, Gieger C, Gjessing HK, Hägg S, Harris JR, Hayward C, et al.: GWAS of 126,559 individuals identifies genetic variants associated with educational attainment. Science 2013, 340:1467-1471.
• [49]Jones KH, Ford DV, Jones PA, John A, Middleton RM, Lockhart-Jones H, Peng J, Osborne LA, Noble JG: How people with multiple sclerosis rate their quality of life: an EQ-5D survey via the UK MS register. PLoS One 2013, 8(6):e65640.
• [50]Kramer L, Hirsch O, Schlössler K, Träger S, Baum E, Donner-Banzhoff N: Associations between demographic, disease related, and treatment pathway related variables and health related quality of life in primary care patients with coronary heart disease. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2012, 10:78. BioMed Central Full Text
• [51]Burström B, Fredlund P: Self rated health: Is it as good a predictor of subsequent mortality among adults in lower as well as in higher social classes? J Epidemiol Community Health 2001, 55(11):836-840.
• [52]Pu C, Tang GJ, Huang N, Chou YJ: Predictive power of self-rated health for subsequent mortality risk during old age: analysis of data from a nationally representative survey of elderly adults in Taiwan. J Epidemiol 2011, 21(4):278-284.
• [53]Mielck A: Social epidemiology and health economics: the need to find common grounds. Eur J Public Health 2013, 23(1):2.
• [54]Dolan P, Shaw R, Tsuchiya A, Williams A: QALY maximisation and people’s preferences: a methodological review of the literature. Health Econ 2005, 14(2):197-208.