Developing the EQ-5D-5L Value Set for Uganda Using the 'Lite' Protocol.
Journal
PharmacoEconomics
ISSN: 1179-2027
Titre abrégé: Pharmacoeconomics
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 9212404
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2022
03 2022
Historique:
accepted:
30
09
2021
pubmed:
30
11
2021
medline:
26
3
2022
entrez:
29
11
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A 'lite' version of the EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol, which requires a smaller sample by collecting more data from each participant, was proposed and used to develop an EQ-5D-5L value set for Uganda. Adult respondents from the general Ugandan population were quota sampled based on age and sex. Eligible participants were asked to complete 20 composite time trade-off tasks in the tablet-assisted personal interviews using the offline EuroQol Portable Valuation Technology software under routine quality control. No discrete choice experiment task was administered. The composite time trade-off data were modelled using four additive and two multiplicative regression models. Model performance was evaluated based on face validity, prediction accuracy in cross-validation and in predicting mild health states. The final value set was generated using the best-performing model. A representative sample (N = 545) participated in this study. Responses to composite time trade-off tasks from 492 participants were included in the primary analysis. All models showed face validity and generated comparable prediction accuracy. The Tobit model with constrained intercepts and corrected for heteroscedasticity was considered the preferred model for the value set on the basis of better performance. The value set ranges from - 1.116 (state 55555) to 1 (state 11111) with 'pain/discomfort' as the most important dimension. This is the first EQ-5D-5L valuation study using a 'lite' protocol involving composite time trade-off data only. Our results suggest its feasibility in resource-constrained settings. The established EQ-5D-5L value set for Uganda is expected to be used for economic evaluations and decision making in Uganda and the East Africa region.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34841471
doi: 10.1007/s40273-021-01101-x
pii: 10.1007/s40273-021-01101-x
pmc: PMC8627844
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Pagination
309-321Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/P028004/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Janssen MF, Pickard AS, Golicki D, Gudex C, Niewada M, Scalone L, et al. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(7):1717–27.
doi: 10.1007/s11136-012-0322-4
Janssen MF, Bonsel GJ, Luo N. Is EQ-5D-5L better than EQ-5D-3L? A head-to-head comparison of descriptive systems and value sets from seven countries. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018;36(6):675–97.
doi: 10.1007/s40273-018-0623-8
Devlin N, Brazier J, Simon Pickard A, Stolk E. Correction to: 3L, 5L, What the L? A NICE conundrum. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018;36(6):729.
doi: 10.1007/s40273-018-0659-9
Pickard AS, De Leon MC, Kohlmann T, Cella D, Rosenbloom S. Psychometric comparison of the standard EQ-5D to a 5 level version in cancer patients. Med Care. 2007;45(3):259–63.
doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000254515.63841.81
Stolk E, Ludwig K, Rand K, van Hout B, Ramos-Goni JM. Overview, update, and lessons learned from the international EQ-5D-5L valuation work: version 2 of the EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value Health. 2019;22(1):23–30.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.05.010
Luo N, Liu G, Li M, Guan H, Jin X, Rand-Hendriksen K. Estimating an EQ-5D-5L value set for China. Value Health. 2017;20(4):662–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.11.016
Shafie AA, Vasan Thakumar A, Lim CJ, Luo N, Rand-Hendriksen K, Md Yusof FA. EQ-5D-5L valuation for the Malaysian population. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37(5):715–25.
doi: 10.1007/s40273-018-0758-7
Shiroiwa T, Ikeda S, Noto S, Igarashi A, Fukuda T, Saito S, et al. Comparison of value set based on DCE and/or TTO data: scoring for EQ-5D-5L health states in Japan. Value Health. 2016;19(5):648–54.
Kim SH, Ahn J, Ock M, Shin S, Park J, Luo N, et al. The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Korea. Qual Life Res. 2016;25(7):1845–52.
doi: 10.1007/s11136-015-1205-2
Lin HW, Li CI, Lin FJ, Chang JY, Gau CS, Luo N, et al. Valuation of the EQ-5D-5L in Taiwan. PLoS One. 2018;13(12):e0209344.
Purba FD, Hunfeld JAM, Iskandarsyah A, Fitriana TS, Sadarjoen SS, Ramos-Goni JM, et al. The Indonesian EQ-5D-5L value set. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017;35(11):1153–65.
doi: 10.1007/s40273-017-0538-9
Versteegh MM, Vermeulen KM, Evers SM, De Wit GA, Prenger R, Stolk EA. Dutch tariff for the five-level version of EQ-5D. Value Health. 2016;19(4):343–52.
Ramos-Goni JM, Craig BM, Oppe M, Ramallo-Farina Y, Pinto-Prades JL, Luo N, et al. Handling data quality issues to estimate the Spanish EQ-5D-5L value set using a hybrid interval regression approach. Value Health. 2018;21(5):596–604.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.10.023
Ludwig K, Graf von der Schulenburg JM, Greiner W. German value set for the EQ-5D-5L. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018;36(6):663–74.
Andrade LF, Ludwig K, Goni JMR, Oppe M, de Pouvourville G. A French value set for the EQ-5D-5L. Pharmacoeconomics. 2020;38(4):413–25.
doi: 10.1007/s40273-019-00876-4
Ferreira PL, Antunes P, Ferreira LN, Pereira LN, Ramos-Goni JM. A hybrid modelling approach for eliciting health state preferences: the Portuguese EQ-5D-5L value set. Qual Life Res. 2019;28(12):3163–75.
doi: 10.1007/s11136-019-02226-5
Rencz F, Brodszky V, Gulacsi L, Golicki D, Ruzsa G, Pickard AS, et al. Parallel valuation of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L by time trade-off in Hungary. Value Health. 2020;23(9):1235–45.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.03.019
Xie F, Pullenayegum E, Gaebel K, Bansback N, Bryan S, Ohinmaa A, et al. A time trade-off-derived value set of the EQ-5D-5L for Canada. Med Care. 2016;54(1):98–105.
doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000447
Pickard AS, Law EH, Jiang R, Pullenayegum E, Shaw JW, Xie F, et al. United States valuation of EQ-5D-5L health states using an international protocol. Value Health. 2019;22(8):931–41.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.02.009
Gutierrez-Delgado C, Galindo-Suarez RM, Cruz-Santiago C, Shah K, Papadimitropoulos M, Feng Y, et al. EQ-5D-5L health-state values for the Mexican population. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-021-00658-0 .
doi: 10.1007/s40258-021-00658-0
pubmed: 34173957
pmcid: 8545780
Augustovski F, Rey-Ares L, Irazola V, Garay OU, Gianneo O, Fernandez G, et al. An EQ-5D-5L value set based on Uruguayan population preferences. Qual Life Res. 2016;25(2):323–33.
doi: 10.1007/s11136-015-1086-4
Augustovski F, Belizan M, Gibbons L, Reyes N, Stolk E, Craig BM, et al. Peruvian valuation of the EQ-5D-5L: a direct comparison of time trade-off and discrete choice experiments. Value Health. 2020;23(7):880–8.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.05.004
WHO. Uganda on the right path to achieving universal health coverage. 2018. https://www.afro.who.int/news/uganda-right-path-achieving-universal-health-coverage . Accessed 8 Oct 2021.
Oortwijn W, Mathijssen J, Banta D. The role of health technology assessment on pharmaceutical reimbursement in selected middle-income countries. Health Policy. 2010;95(2–3):174–84.
doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.12.008
Jelsma J, Hansen K, De Weerdt W, De Cock P, Kind P. How do Zimbabweans value health states? Popul Health Metr. 2003;1(1):11.
doi: 10.1186/1478-7954-1-11
Chemli J, Drira C, Felfel H, Roudijk B, Al Sayah F, Kouki M, et al. Valuing health-related quality of life using a hybrid approach: Tunisian value set for the EQ-5D-3L. Qual Life Res. 2021;30(5):1445–55.
doi: 10.1007/s11136-020-02730-z
Welie AG, Gebretekle GB, Stolk E, Mukuria C, Krahn MD, Enquoselassie F, et al. Valuing health state: an EQ-5D-5L value set for Ethiopians. Value Health Reg Issues. 2020;22:7–14.
doi: 10.1016/j.vhri.2019.08.475
Oppe M, Rand-Hendriksen K, Shah K, Ramos-Goni JM, Luo N. EuroQol protocols for time trade-off valuation of health outcomes. Pharmacoeconomics. 2016;34(10):993–1004.
doi: 10.1007/s40273-016-0404-1
Yang Z, Luo N, Oppe M, Bonsel G, Busschbach J, Stolk E. Toward a smaller design for EQ-5D-5L valuation studies. Value Health. 2019;22(11):1295–302.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.06.008
Mayor S. AIDS vaccine trial begins in Uganda. BMJ. 2003;326(7386):414.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7386.414/c
Mugerwa RD, Kaleebu P, Mugyenyi P, Katongole-Mbidde E, Hom DL, Byaruhanga R, et al. First trial of the HIV-1 vaccine in Africa: Ugandan experience. BMJ. 2002;324(7331):226–9.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7331.226
Muwanguzi PA, Kutyabami P, Osingada CP, Nasuuna EM, Kitutu FE, Ngabirano TD, et al. Conducting an ongoing HIV clinical trial during the COVID-19 pandemic in Uganda: a qualitative study of research team and participants’ experiences and lessons learnt. BMJ Open. 2021;11(4):e048825.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048825
Ssengooba F. Uganda’s minimum health care package: rationing within the minimum? 2004.
Lara AM, Wakholi BN, Kasirye A, Munderi P, Watera C, Lalloo DG, et al. Utility assessment of HIV/AIDS-related health states in HIV-infected Ugandans. AIDS. 2008;22(Suppl. 1):S123–30.
doi: 10.1097/01.aids.0000327633.85221.9a
UBOS. National population and housing census. 2014. https://www.ubos.org/2014-census/ . Accessed 8 Oct 2021.
Oppe M, Devlin NJ, van Hout B, Krabbe PF, de Charro F. A program of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value Health. 2014;17(4):445–53.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.04.002
Feng Y, Devlin NJ, Shah KK, Mulhern B, van Hout B. New methods for modelling EQ-5D-5L value sets: an application to English data. Health Econ. 2018;27(1):23–38.
doi: 10.1002/hec.3560
Katumba KR, Laurence YV, Tenywa P, Ssebunnya J, Laszewska A, Simon J, et al. Cultural and linguistic adaptation of the multi-dimensional OXCAP-MH for outcome measurement of mental health among people living with HIV/AIDS in Uganda: the Luganda version. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2021;5(1):32.
doi: 10.1186/s41687-021-00306-0