Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Jul 17:7:12.
doi: 10.1186/1478-7547-7-12.

Comparing the performance of the EQ-5D and SF-6D when measuring the benefits of alleviating knee pain

Garry R Barton  1 , Tracey H Sach, Anthony J Avery, Michael Doherty, Claire Jenkinson, Kenneth R Muir
Affiliations

Comparing the performance of the EQ-5D and SF-6D when measuring the benefits of alleviating knee pain

Garry R Barton et al. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. .

Abstract

Objective: To assess the practicality, validity and responsiveness of using each of two utility measures (the EQ-5D and SF-6D) to measure the benefits of alleviating knee pain.

Methods: Participants in a randomised controlled trial, which was designed to compare four different interventions for people with self-reported knee pain, were asked to complete the EQ-5D, SF-6D, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) at both pre- and post-intervention. For both utility measures, we assessed their practicality (completion rate), construct validity (ability to discriminate between baseline WOMAC severity levels), and responsiveness (ability to discriminate between three groups: those whose total WOMAC score, i) did not improve, ii) improved by <20%, and iii) improved by > or = 20%).

Results: The EQ-5D was completed by 97.7% of the 389 participants, compared to 93.3% for the SF-6D. Both the EQ-5D and SF-6D were able to discriminate between participants with different levels of WOMAC severity (p < 0.001). The mean EQ-5D change was -0.036 for group i), 0.091 for group ii), and 0.127 for group iii), compared to 0.021, 0.023 and 0.053 on the SF-6D. These change scores were significantly different according to the EQ-5D (p < 0.001), but not the SF-6D.

Conclusion: The EQ-5D and SF-6D had largely comparable practicality and construct validity. However, in contrast to the EQ-5D, the SF-6D could not discriminate between those who improved post-intervention, and those who did not. This suggests that it is more appropriate to use the EQ-5D in future cost-effectiveness analyses of interventions which are designed to alleviate knee pain.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Jinks C, Jordan K, Ong BN, Croft P. A brief screening tool for knee pain in primary care (KNEST). 2. Results from a survey in the general population aged 50 and over. Rheumatology. 2004;43:55–61. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keg438. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hurley MV, Walsh NE, Mitchell HL, Pimm TJ, Williamson E, Jones RH, Reeves BC, Dieppe RA, Patel A. Economic evaluation of a rehabilitation program integrating exercise, self-Management, and active coping strategies for chronic knee pain. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57:1220–1229. doi: 10.1002/art.23011. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O'Brien BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes (3rd Edition) New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.
    1. Sach TH, Barton GR, Doherty M, Muir K, Jenkinson C, Avery AJ. The relationship between BMI and health related quality of life: comparing the EQ-5D, EuroQol VAS, and SF-6D. Int J Obes (Lond) . 2007;31:189–196. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0803365. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy. 1996;37:53–72. doi: 10.1016/0168-8510(96)00822-6. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources