A review of health utilities using the EQ-5D in studies of cardiovascular disease

165Citations
Citations of this article
176Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: The EQ-5D has been extensively used to assess patient utility in trials of new treatments within the cardiovascular field. The aims of this study were to review evidence of the validity and reliability of the EQ-5D, and to summarise utility scores based on the use of the EQ-5D in clinical trials and in studies of patients with cardiovascular disease.Methods: A structured literature search was conducted using keywords related to cardiovascular disease and EQ-5D. Original research studies of patients with cardiovascular disease that reported EQ-5D results and its measurement properties were included.Results: Of 147 identified papers, 66 met the selection criteria, with 10 studies reporting evidence on validity or reliability and 60 reporting EQ-5D responses (VAS or self-classification). Mean EQ-5D index-based scores ranged from 0.24 (SD 0.39) to 0.90 (SD 0.16), while VAS scores ranged from 37 (SD 21) to 89 (no SD reported). Stratification of EQ-5D index scores by disease severity revealed that scores decreased from a mean of 0.78 (SD 0.18) to 0.51 (SD 0.21) for mild to severe disease in heart failure patients and from 0.80 (SD 0.05) to 0.45 (SD 0.22) for mild to severe disease in angina patients.Conclusions: The published evidence generally supports the validity and reliability of the EQ-5D as an outcome measure within the cardiovascular area. This review provides utility estimates across a range of cardiovascular subgroups and treatments that may be useful for future modelling of utilities and QALYs in economic evaluations within the cardiovascular area. © 2010 Dyer et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dyer, M. T. D., Goldsmith, K. A., Sharples, L. S., & Buxton, M. J. (2010). A review of health utilities using the EQ-5D in studies of cardiovascular disease. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-8-13

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free