Health state utilities and subjective well-being among psoriasis vulgaris patients in mainland China
To investigate the validity of direct and indirect health state utility (HSU) and subjective well-being measures in psoriasis vulgaris patients.
A convenience sampling framework was used to successively recruit patients with psoriasis vulgaris from the outpatient clinics of a tertiary hospital in Changsha, Central South China. Participants completed time trade-off (TTO), standard gamble (SG), the five-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L), the WHO-5 well-being index, and the psoriasis disability index (PDI). The concurrent and known-groups validity of HSUs and well-being index in psoriasis patients were firstly studied. The agreements among HSUs and the relationship between HSU and well-being measures were further explored.
A valid sample of 343 patients was analyzed. Mean HSU and well-being scores elicited from the EQ-5D-5L/TTO/SG and WHO-5 were 0.90/0.85/0.88 and 13.69, respectively. The Spearman correlation (concurrent validity) was the strongest between PDI and WHO-5 (r = 0.45), followed by with EQ-5D-5L (0.38), SG (r = 0.20), and the TTO (r = 0.18). The pairwise intraclass correlation coefficients among the three HSU measures were < 0.30. The known-groups validity was evident in all measures except for the SG. Exploratory factor analysis further suggests a complementary relationship between the EQ-5D-5L and WHO-5.
There is a poor agreement between direct and indirect methods on measuring HSU with psoriasis vulgaris. Results from this study recommend that the EQ-5D-5L is the most preferred method to elicit HSU from psoriasis vulgaris patients in mainland China. It is important to further analyze the subjective well-being in addition to the HSU to fully understand the impact of psoriasis.
KeywordsPsoriasis vulgaris Health state utility EQ-5D-5L Time trade-off Standard gamble Well-being
The authors thank all the participants for their time and effort. Responsibility for any remaining errors lies solely with the authors.
The project was sponsored by the Scientific Research Foundation for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars, State Education Ministry (No. 311).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The study was approved by the Ethics Review Board of the School of Medicine, Shandong University (Reference No. LL-201401044), and the research adhered to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 3.Shao, C. G., Zhang, G. W., & Wang, G. C. (1987). Distribution of psoriasis in China: A nationwide screening. Proceedings of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Peking Union Medical College, 2(2), 59–65.Google Scholar
- 5.Colombo, D., & Perego, R. (2013). Quality of life in psoriasis. In H. Lima (Ed.), Psoriasis: types, causes and medication (Chap. 07). Rijeka: InTech.Google Scholar
- 6.WHO (2016). Global Report on Psoriasis, http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/204417/1/9789241565189_eng.pdf. Accessed March 21 2017.
- 9.von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- 12.Gray, A. M., Clarke, P. M., Wolstenholme, J. L., & Wordsworth, S. (2010). Applied methods of cost-effectiveness analysis in healthcare. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- 17.Chen, G., Ratcliffe, J., Kaambwa, B., Mccaffrey, N., & Richardson, J. (2017). Empirical comparison between capability and two health-related quality of life measures. Social Indicators Research, (1), 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1788-9.
- 28.Fayers, P., & Machin, D. (2013). Quality of life: The assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes: Wiley.Google Scholar
- 35.Matza, L. S., Boye, K. S., Feeny, D. H., Bowman, L., Johnston, J. A., Stewart, K. D., et al. (2015). The time horizon matters: Results of an exploratory study varying the timeframe in time trade-off and standard gamble utility elicitation. European Journal of Health Economics Hepac Health Economics in Prevention & Care, 17(8), 1–12.Google Scholar