Comparability of patient-reported health status: multicountry analysis of EQ-5D responses in patients with type 2 diabetes

Joshua A Salomon, Anushka Patel, Bruce Neal, Paul Glasziou, Diederick E Grobbee, John Chalmers, Philip M Clarke

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Valid and comparable measures of health outcomes are needed for clinical trials, studies on quality of healthcare, and population health monitoring.

OBJECTIVE: To examine comparability of patient-reported health status across populations.

RESEARCH DESIGN: Logistic regression analysis of health status across regions, controlling for demographics, risk factors, and clinical event history.

SETTING: Multicenter clinical trial in 20 countries, grouped into 3 regions defined by geography and levels of economic development (Asia, Established Market Economies, Eastern Europe).

SUBJECTS: 11,140 people with type 2 diabetes.

MEASURES: Patient-reported health status in 5 domains (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) using EQ-5D.

RESULTS: Examining unadjusted response probabilities, patients in Eastern Europe were consistently more likely than patients in other regions to report problems in all domains. Compared to Asia, probabilities of reporting problems at baseline in Eastern Europe were more than 3 times higher for mobility or usual activities, and more than 6 times higher for self-care. Patients in Asia were less likely than patients in Established Market Economies to report problems in all domains except anxiety/depression. Substantial regional reporting differences persisted after controlling for demographics, common risk factors, and history of major disease complications. Compared to Established Market Economies, adjusted odds ratios for reporting problems in at least 1 health domain were 1.79 (1.55 to 2.06) in Eastern Europe and 0.76 (0.67 to 0.86) in Asia.

CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variation across regions in reporting on functional health problems, which cannot be explained by differences in demographic variables, clinical risk factors, or rates of complications. This suggests that commonly used health status instruments may have important problems in comparability across settings.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)962-70
Number of pages9
JournalMedical Care
Volume49
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011

Fingerprint

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Health Status
Eastern Europe
Health
Demography
Self Care
Anxiety
Clinical Trials
Depression
Geography
Economic Development
Quality of Health Care
Population
Multicenter Studies
Logistic Models
Odds Ratio
Regression Analysis
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Pain

Cite this

Salomon, Joshua A ; Patel, Anushka ; Neal, Bruce ; Glasziou, Paul ; Grobbee, Diederick E ; Chalmers, John ; Clarke, Philip M. / Comparability of patient-reported health status : multicountry analysis of EQ-5D responses in patients with type 2 diabetes. In: Medical Care. 2011 ; Vol. 49, No. 10. pp. 962-70.
@article{4fa1170d421f43c9a768d306343f3158,
title = "Comparability of patient-reported health status: multicountry analysis of EQ-5D responses in patients with type 2 diabetes",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Valid and comparable measures of health outcomes are needed for clinical trials, studies on quality of healthcare, and population health monitoring.OBJECTIVE: To examine comparability of patient-reported health status across populations.RESEARCH DESIGN: Logistic regression analysis of health status across regions, controlling for demographics, risk factors, and clinical event history.SETTING: Multicenter clinical trial in 20 countries, grouped into 3 regions defined by geography and levels of economic development (Asia, Established Market Economies, Eastern Europe).SUBJECTS: 11,140 people with type 2 diabetes.MEASURES: Patient-reported health status in 5 domains (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) using EQ-5D.RESULTS: Examining unadjusted response probabilities, patients in Eastern Europe were consistently more likely than patients in other regions to report problems in all domains. Compared to Asia, probabilities of reporting problems at baseline in Eastern Europe were more than 3 times higher for mobility or usual activities, and more than 6 times higher for self-care. Patients in Asia were less likely than patients in Established Market Economies to report problems in all domains except anxiety/depression. Substantial regional reporting differences persisted after controlling for demographics, common risk factors, and history of major disease complications. Compared to Established Market Economies, adjusted odds ratios for reporting problems in at least 1 health domain were 1.79 (1.55 to 2.06) in Eastern Europe and 0.76 (0.67 to 0.86) in Asia.CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variation across regions in reporting on functional health problems, which cannot be explained by differences in demographic variables, clinical risk factors, or rates of complications. This suggests that commonly used health status instruments may have important problems in comparability across settings.",
author = "Salomon, {Joshua A} and Anushka Patel and Bruce Neal and Paul Glasziou and Grobbee, {Diederick E} and John Chalmers and Clarke, {Philip M}",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182239489",
language = "English",
volume = "49",
pages = "962--70",
journal = "Medical Care",
issn = "0025-7079",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams & Wilkins",
number = "10",

}

Comparability of patient-reported health status : multicountry analysis of EQ-5D responses in patients with type 2 diabetes. / Salomon, Joshua A; Patel, Anushka; Neal, Bruce; Glasziou, Paul; Grobbee, Diederick E; Chalmers, John; Clarke, Philip M.

In: Medical Care, Vol. 49, No. 10, 2011, p. 962-70.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparability of patient-reported health status

T2 - multicountry analysis of EQ-5D responses in patients with type 2 diabetes

AU - Salomon, Joshua A

AU - Patel, Anushka

AU - Neal, Bruce

AU - Glasziou, Paul

AU - Grobbee, Diederick E

AU - Chalmers, John

AU - Clarke, Philip M

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - BACKGROUND: Valid and comparable measures of health outcomes are needed for clinical trials, studies on quality of healthcare, and population health monitoring.OBJECTIVE: To examine comparability of patient-reported health status across populations.RESEARCH DESIGN: Logistic regression analysis of health status across regions, controlling for demographics, risk factors, and clinical event history.SETTING: Multicenter clinical trial in 20 countries, grouped into 3 regions defined by geography and levels of economic development (Asia, Established Market Economies, Eastern Europe).SUBJECTS: 11,140 people with type 2 diabetes.MEASURES: Patient-reported health status in 5 domains (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) using EQ-5D.RESULTS: Examining unadjusted response probabilities, patients in Eastern Europe were consistently more likely than patients in other regions to report problems in all domains. Compared to Asia, probabilities of reporting problems at baseline in Eastern Europe were more than 3 times higher for mobility or usual activities, and more than 6 times higher for self-care. Patients in Asia were less likely than patients in Established Market Economies to report problems in all domains except anxiety/depression. Substantial regional reporting differences persisted after controlling for demographics, common risk factors, and history of major disease complications. Compared to Established Market Economies, adjusted odds ratios for reporting problems in at least 1 health domain were 1.79 (1.55 to 2.06) in Eastern Europe and 0.76 (0.67 to 0.86) in Asia.CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variation across regions in reporting on functional health problems, which cannot be explained by differences in demographic variables, clinical risk factors, or rates of complications. This suggests that commonly used health status instruments may have important problems in comparability across settings.

AB - BACKGROUND: Valid and comparable measures of health outcomes are needed for clinical trials, studies on quality of healthcare, and population health monitoring.OBJECTIVE: To examine comparability of patient-reported health status across populations.RESEARCH DESIGN: Logistic regression analysis of health status across regions, controlling for demographics, risk factors, and clinical event history.SETTING: Multicenter clinical trial in 20 countries, grouped into 3 regions defined by geography and levels of economic development (Asia, Established Market Economies, Eastern Europe).SUBJECTS: 11,140 people with type 2 diabetes.MEASURES: Patient-reported health status in 5 domains (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) using EQ-5D.RESULTS: Examining unadjusted response probabilities, patients in Eastern Europe were consistently more likely than patients in other regions to report problems in all domains. Compared to Asia, probabilities of reporting problems at baseline in Eastern Europe were more than 3 times higher for mobility or usual activities, and more than 6 times higher for self-care. Patients in Asia were less likely than patients in Established Market Economies to report problems in all domains except anxiety/depression. Substantial regional reporting differences persisted after controlling for demographics, common risk factors, and history of major disease complications. Compared to Established Market Economies, adjusted odds ratios for reporting problems in at least 1 health domain were 1.79 (1.55 to 2.06) in Eastern Europe and 0.76 (0.67 to 0.86) in Asia.CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variation across regions in reporting on functional health problems, which cannot be explained by differences in demographic variables, clinical risk factors, or rates of complications. This suggests that commonly used health status instruments may have important problems in comparability across settings.

U2 - 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182239489

DO - 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182239489

M3 - Article

VL - 49

SP - 962

EP - 970

JO - Medical Care

JF - Medical Care

SN - 0025-7079

IS - 10

ER -