EQ-5D And SF-6D For Cost-Utility Analysis: Does It Matter?

Main Category: Public Health
Article Date: 05 Nov 2009 - 2:00 PST

email to a friend   printer friendly   view / write opinions   rate article

Instruments that estimate a single index value for health are increasingly used to measure utilities for health states for the estimation of quality adjusted life years (QALYs) in cost-utility analyses. Much of the appeal in using cost-utility analyses is in the comparability across conditions and interventions. Therefore, it is important to know whether using different instruments has impact on the probability that an incremental cost-utility ratio is acceptable.

In a recent study ("Differences in EQ-5D and SF-6D utility scores on the acceptability of cost-utility ratios", published, along with an editorial, in Value in Health), this was investigated in five datasets with different interventions, disease conditions and severity (musculoskeletal disease, cardiovascular pulmonary disease and psychological disorders).

Says principal researcher Dr. Manuela Joore, "In the patient groups with a relatively mild health condition the probability of acceptance of the incremental cost-utility ratio was considerably larger when using the EQ-5D to estimate utility than when using the SF-6D. While in the patient groups with worse health conditions this was the other way around. The observed incomparability of the results of cost-utility analyses using different instruments to estimate utilities for health states severely reduces the credibility of the use of incremental cost-utility ratios for decision making".

Value in Health (ISSN 1098-3015) publishes papers, concepts, and ideas that advance the field of pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research and help health care leaders to make decisions that are solidly evidence-based. The journal is published bi-monthly and has a regular readership of over 4,000 clinicians, decision-makers, and researchers worldwide.

ISPOR is a nonprofit, international organization that strives to translate pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research into practice to ensure that society allocates scarce health care resources wisely, fairly, and efficiently.

Source
ISPOR