Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D in assessing and valuing health status in patients with social phobia

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Hans-Helmut König³  Eric Leibing⁶  Jörg Wiltink⁴  Ulrike Willutzki¹  Bernhard Strauss⁵  Ulrich Stangier⁹  Karin Pöhlmann^1,10  Björn Nolting²  Peter Joraschky^1,10  Jürgen Hoyer^1,11  Wolfgang Hiller⁸  Stephan Herpertz²  Manfred E Beutel⁴  Simone Salzer⁶  Falk Leichsenring⁷  Alexander Konnopka³  Michael Sonntag³ 

[1] Department of Clinical psychology and psychotherapy, Ruhr-University Bochum, Universitätsstr. 150, 44780 Bochum, Germany;Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LWL-University Clinic Bochum, Ruhr University Bochum, Alexandrinenstr 1-3, 44791 Bochum, Germany;Department of Health Economics and Health Services Research, Hamburg Center for Health Economics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany;Clinic and Policlinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckstraße 1, 55131 Mainz, Germany;Institute of Psychosocial Medicine and Psychotherapy, Jena University Hospital, Stoystraße 3, 07740 Jena, Germany;Clinic of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medicine, Georg-August-University of Göttingen, von-Siebold-Str. 5, 37075 Göttingen, Germany;Clinic of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Justus-Liebig-University of Giessen, Friedrichstr. 33, 35392 Giessen, Germany;Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Wallstr 3, 55122 Mainz, Germany;Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Goethe University Frankfurt, Varrentrappstr. 40-42, 60486 Frankfurt am Main, Germany;Clinic of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Technical University Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307 Dresden, Germany;Institute of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Technical University Dresden, Hohe Str. 53, 01187 Dresden, Germany

关键词: Responsiveness;    Validity;    Reliability;    EQ-5D;    Social phobia;   

Others  :  821926
DOI  :  10.1186/1477-7525-11-215

 received in 2013-05-23, accepted in 2013-12-18,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Objective

The aim of the study was to analyse the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D in patients with social phobia.

Methods

We used a sample of 445 patients with social phobia with five measurement points over a 30 month period. The discriminative ability of the EQ-5D was analysed by comparing the patients’ responses with the general population and between different disease severity levels. For test-retest reliability we assessed the level of agreement in patients’ responses over time, when there was no change in the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS). Construct validity was analysed by identifying correlations of the EQ-5D with more specific instruments. For responsiveness we compared the means of EQ VAS/EQ-5D index anchored on improved (deteriorated) health status and computed effect sizes as well as a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Results

Compared to the general population, patients with social phobia reported more problems in the dimensions “usual activities”, “pain/discomfort”, and “anxiety/depression” and less problems in “mobility” and “self-care”. The EQ-5D was able to distinguish between different disease severity levels. The test-retest reliability was moderate (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.6). Correlations between the EQ-5D and other instruments were mostly small except for correlations with Beck Depression Inventory. The EQ-5D index seemed to be more responsive than the EQ VAS, but with only medium effect sizes (0.5 < effect size < 0.8) in the British EQ-5D index and only significant in patients with improved health status. The ROC analysis revealed no significant results.

Conclusions

The EQ-5D was moderately reliable and responsive in patients with improved health status. Construct validity was limited.

Trial registration

Current controlled trials ISRCTN53517394

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Sonntag et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Stark RG, Reitmeir P, Leidl R, Konig HH: Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the EQ-5D in inflammatory bowel disease in Germany. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2010, 16:42-51.
• [2]Hunger M, Sabariego C, Stollenwerk B, Cieza A, Leidl R: Validity, reliability and responsiveness of the EQ-5D in German stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation. Qual Life Res 2012, 21:1205-1216.
• [3]König HH, Roick C, Angermeyer MC: Validity of the EQ-5D in assessing and valuing health status in patients with schizophrenic, schizotypal or delusional disorders. Eur Psychiatry 2007, 22:177-187.
• [4]König HH, Born A, Günther O, Matschinger H, Heinrich S, Riedel-Heller SG, Angermeyer MC, Roick C: Validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D in assessing and valuing health status in patients with anxiety disorders. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2010, 8:47. BioMed Central Full Text
• [5]Hedman E, Andersson E, Ljotsson B, Andersson G, Ruck C, Lindefors N: Cost-effectiveness of Internet-based cognitive behavior therapy vs. cognitive behavioral group therapy for social anxiety disorder: results from a randomized controlled trial. Behav Res Ther 2011, 49:729-736.
• [6]Sherbourne CD, Sullivan G, Craske MG, Roy-Byrne P, Golinelli D, Rose RD, Chavira DA, Bystritsky A, Stein MB: Functioning and disability levels in primary care out-patients with one or more anxiety disorders. Psychol Med 2010, 40:2059-2068.
• [7]Saarni SI, Suvisaari J, Sintonen H, Pirkola S, Koskinen S, Aromaa A, Lonnqvist J: Impact of psychiatric disorders on health-related quality of life: general population survey. Br J Psychiatry 2007, 190:326-332.
• [8]Lamers LM, Bouwmans CA, van Straten A, Donker MC, Hakkaart L: Comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities in mental health patients. Health Econ 2006, 15:1229-1236.
• [9]Olesen J, Gustavsson A, Svensson M, Wittchen HU, Jonsson B: The economic cost of brain disorders in Europe. Eur J Neurol 2012, 19:155-162.
• [10]Dimdi: ICD-10-GM 2005 - international statistical classification of diseases and related health problems- German modification 10: revision, version 2005. Köln: Deutscher Ärzte-Verlag; 2005.
• [11]American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders. 4th edition. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.
• [12]Magee WJ, Eaton WW, Wittchen HU, McGonagle KA, Kessler RC: Agoraphobia, simple phobia, and social phobia in the National Comorbidity Survey. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1996, 53:159-168.
• [13]DeWit DJ, Ogborne A, Offord DR, MacDonald K: Antecedents of the risk of recovery from DSM-III-R social phobia. Psychol Med 1999, 29:569-582.
• [14]Canton J, Scott KM, Glue P: Optimal treatment of social phobia: systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat 2012, 8:203-215.
• [15]Leichsenring F, Hoyer J, Beutel M, Herpertz S, Hiller W, Irle E, Joraschky P, Konig HH, de Liz TM, Nolting B, et al.: The social phobia psychotherapy research network: the first multicenter randomized controlled trial of psychotherapy for social phobia: rationale, methods and patient characteristics. Psychother Psychosom 2009, 78:35-41.
• [16]Leichsenring F, Salzer S, Beutel ME, Herpertz S, Hiller W, Hoyer J, Huesing J, Joraschky P, Nolting B, Poehlmann K, et al.: Psychodynamic therapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy in social anxiety disorder: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Am J Psychiatry 2013, 170:759-767.
• [17]Wittchen HU, Zaudig M, Fydrich T: Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV. Goettingen: Hogrefe; 1997.
• [18]Mennin DS, Fresco DM, Heimberg RG, Schneier FR, Davies SO, Liebowitz MR: Screening for social anxiety disorder in the clinical setting: using the Liebowitz social anxiety scale. J Anxiety Disord 2002, 16:661-673.
• [19]Brown PAD, David H: Barlow TA: Anxiety disorders interview schedule (ADIS-IV) for DSM-IV: includes clinician manual; ADIS-IV client interview schedule (lifetime version); ADIS-IV client interview schedule (adult version). Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; 1994.
• [20]Group EQ: EuroQol–a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQol Group. Health Policy 1990, 16:199-208.
• [21]Greiner W, Claes C, Busschbach JJ, von der Schulenburg JM: Validating the EQ-5D with time trade off for the German population. Eur J Health Econ 2005, 6:124-130.
• [22]Dolan P: Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 1997, 35:1095-1108.
• [23]Liebowitz MR: Social phobia. Mod Probl Pharmacopsychiatry 1987, 22:141-173.
• [24]Turner SM, Beidel DC, Dancu CV, Stanley MA: An empirically derived inventory to measure social fears and anxiety: the social phobia and anxiety inventory. Psychological Assessment 1989, 1:35-40.
• [25]Fydrich T: SPAI - Social phobia and anxiety inventory. In Diagnostische Verfahren in der Psychotherapie. Edited by Brähler E, Schumacher J, Straus B. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2002.
• [26]Beck AT, Steer RA, Ball R, Ranieri W: Comparison of beck depression inventories -IA and -II in psychiatric outpatients. J Pers Assess 1996, 67:588-597.
• [27]Luo X, Cappelleri JC: A practical guide on incorporating and evaluating patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials. Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs 2008, 25:197-211.
• [28]König HH, Bernert S, Angermeyer MC: Health status of the German population: results of a representative survey using the EuroQol questionnaire. Gesundheitswesen 2005, 67:173-182.
• [29]Walters SJ: Quality of life outcomes in clinical trials and health-care evaluation: a practical guide to analysis and interpretation. Chichester: Wiley; 2009.
• [30]Streiner DL, Norman GR: Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 4th edition. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.
• [31]Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW: Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care 2003, 41:582-592.
• [32]Sloan JA, Cella D, Hays RD: Clinical significance of patient-reported questionnaire data: another step toward consensus. J Clin Epidemiol 2005, 58:1217-1219.
• [33]Cohen J: Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd edition. Hillsdale, N.J: L. Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
• [34]Revicki DA, Cella D, Hays RD, Sloan JA, Lenderking WR, Aaronson NK: Responsiveness and minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006, 4:70. BioMed Central Full Text
• [35]Terwee CB, Dekker FW, Wiersinga WM, Prummel MF, Bossuyt PM: On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation. Qual Life Res 2003, 12:349-362.
• [36]Whynes DK, McCahon RA, Ravenscroft A, Hodgkinson V, Evley R, Hardman JG: Responsiveness of the EQ-5D health-related quality-of-life instrument in assessing low back pain. Value Health 2013, 16:124-132.
• [37]Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD: Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol 2000, 53:459-468.
• [38]Lehman LA, Velozo CA: Ability to detect change in patient function: responsiveness designs and methods of calculation. J Hand Ther 2010, 23:361-370. quiz 371
• [39]Deyo RA, Centor RM: Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chronic Dis 1986, 39:897-906.
• [40]Fawcett T: An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recognit Lett 2006, 27:861-874.