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
. 2025 Jun 8;14(2):e003214.
doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2024-003214.

Why EQ-5D and the Oxford Hip and Knee scores do not measure the same things

Affiliations

Why EQ-5D and the Oxford Hip and Knee scores do not measure the same things

Tim Benson. BMJ Open Qual. .

Abstract

Introduction: The outcome of treatment is always paramount for patients and healthcare professionals. Patient-reported outcome measures have been developed to measure outcomes.Since 2009, all patients in England having hip and knee replacement surgery have been asked to complete the generic EuroQol EQ-5D-3L and EQ visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) and the condition-specific Oxford Hip Score or Oxford Knee Score for hips and knees, respectively.

Methods: EQ-5D-3L has five dimensions with three options each. Each combination has been scaled relative to the best conceivable health state (value 1.0) and the state of dead (value 0) to produce a relative severity score (EQ-Index) with a range from -0.594 to 1.0. This can be used to calculate quality-adjusted life-years. The EQ-VAS is a visual analogue scale from 0 (dead) to 100 (best conceivable health state).The Oxford Hip and Knee scores are similar to each other. They have 12 questions with five options each, scored 0-4. These scores are added, giving a scale with range 0 (no problems) to 48 (extreme problems on all questions).Using over 40 000 records for patients undergoing hip and knee replacements from the National Health Service patient-reported outcome measure database, we compare EQ-5D-3L with the Oxford Hip and Knee scores. To aid comparison, each score was transformed arithmetically to a common 0 (floor) to 100 (ceiling) scale.

Results: EQ-Index, EQ-VAS and the Oxford scores give very different results in terms of change, effect size and correlation.

Discussion: More research is needed, but some speculative ideas are put forward, which could explain these findings.

Keywords: Health Impact Assessment; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Quality improvement; Quality improvement methodologies; Quality measurement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: TB is a director of R-Outcomes Ltd, a supplier of generic patient-reported outcome measures.

Similar articles

References

    1. Smith P. NHS outcomes, performance and productivity: report of the office of health economics commission. London: OHE; 2008.
    1. Greenhalgh J. The applications of PROs in clinical practice: what are they, do they work, and why? Qual Life Res. 2009;18:115–23. doi: 10.1007/s11136-008-9430-6. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Salomon JA, et al. Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation. 2nd. Oxford University Press; 2016. edn.
    1. Churruca K, Pomare C, Ellis LA, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): A review of generic and condition-specific measures and a discussion of trends and issues. Health Expect. 2021;24:1015–24. doi: 10.1111/hex.13254. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brooks RG. 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