The high rate of psoriasis patients with NRRs, especially among women, less educated and elderly patients, indicates a content validity problem of the measure. A reconsideration of the use of the DLQI for medical and financial decision-making in psoriasis patients is suggested.
The EQ-5D-5L seems to improve measurement properties by reducing ceiling effects, strengthening correlations with PASI and improving informativity. Follow-up studies are needed to test responsiveness and reliability in psoriasis.
Background To date, a multi-country review evaluating the cost-of-illness (COI) studies from the Central and Eastern European (CEE) region has not yet been published. Our main objective was to provide a general description about published COI studies from CEE. Methods A systematic search was performed between 1 January 2006 and 1 June 2017 in Medline, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Web of Science to identify all relevant COI studies from nine CEE countries. COI studies reporting costs without any restrictions by age, co-morbidities, or treatment were included. Methodology, publication standards, and cost results were analysed. Results We identified 58 studies providing 83 country-specific COI results: Austria ( n = 9), Bulgaria ( n = 16), Croatia ( n = 3), the Czech Republic ( n = 10), Hungary ( n = 24), Poland ( n = 11), Romania ( n = 3), Slovakia ( n = 3), and Slovenia ( n = 4). Endocrine, nutritional, and metabolic diseases (18%), neoplasms (12%), infections (11%), and neurological disorders (11%) were the most frequently studied clinical areas, and multiple sclerosis was the most commonly studied disease. Overall, 57 (98%) of the studies explicitly stated the source of resource use data, 45 (78%) the study perspective, 34 (64%) the costing method, and 24 (58%) reported at least one unit costs. Regardless of methodological differences, a positive relationship was observed between costs of diseases and countries’ per capita GDP. Conclusions Cost-of-illness studies varied considerably in terms of methodology, publication practice, and clinical areas. Due to these heterogeneities, transferability of the COI results is limited across Central and Eastern European countries. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10198-019-01066-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Purpose Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease that affects up to 1% of the population in Europe. The EQ-5D is the most commonly used generic instrument for measuring health-related quality of life among HS patients. This study aims to compare the measurement properties of the two adult versions of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L) in patients with HS. Methods We recruited 200 consecutive patients with HS (mean age 37 years, 38% severe or very severe HS) to participate in a multicentre cross-sectional survey. Patients completed the EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and Skindex-16 questionnaires. Results More than twice as many different health state profiles occurred in the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L (101 vs. 43). A significant reduction in ceiling effect was found for the mobility, self-care and usual activities dimensions. A good agreement was established between the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.872 (95% CI 0.830–0.903; p < 0.001) that was confirmed by a Bland-Altman plot. EQ-5D-5L improved both the absolute and relative informativity in all dimensions except for anxiety/depression. EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L demonstrated similar convergent validity with DLQI and Skindex-16. EQ-5D-5L was able to better discriminate between known groups of patients based on the number of comorbidities and disease severity (HS-Physician's Global Assessment). Conclusion In patients with HS, the EQ-5D-5L outperformed the EQ-5D-3L in feasibility, ceiling effects, informativity and known-groups validity for many important clinical characteristics. We recommend using the EQ-5D-5L in HS patients across various settings, including clinical care, research and economic evaluations.
Purpose Eight of the ten items of the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) have a ‘not relevant’ response (NRR) option. There are two possible ways to interpret NRRs: they may be considered ‘not at all’ or missing responses. We aim to compare the measurement performance of the DLQI in psoriasis patients when NRRs are scored as ‘0’ (hereafter zero-scoring) and ‘missing’ (hereafter missing-scoring) using Rasch model analysis. Methods Data of 425 patients with psoriasis from two earlier cross-sectional surveys were re-analysed. All patients completed the paper-based Hungarian version of the DLQI. A partial credit model was applied. The following model assumptions and measurement properties were tested: dimensionality, item fit, person reliability, order of response options and differential item functioning (DIF). Results Principal component analysis of the residuals of the Rasch model confirmed the unidimensional structure of the DLQI. Person separation reliability indices were similar with zero-scoring (0.910) and missing-scoring (0.914) NRRs. With zero-scoring, items 6 (sport), 7 (working/studying) and 9 (sexual difficulties) suffered from item misfit and item-level disordering. With missing-scoring, no misfit was observed and only item 7 was illogically ordered. Six and three items showed DIF for gender and age, respectively, that were reduced to four and three by missing-scoring. Conclusions Missing-scoring NRRs resulted in an improved measurement performance of the scale. DLQI scores of patients with at least one vs. no NRRs cannot be directly compared. Our findings provide further empirical support to the DLQI-R scoring modification that treats NRRs as missing and replaces them with the average score of the relevant items.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.