4.5 Article

Validity, responsiveness, and minimal clinically important difference of EQ-5D-5L in stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation

Journal

QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
Volume 25, Issue 6, Pages 1585-1596

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-015-1196-z

Keywords

Stroke; Quality of life; Rehabilitation; Validity; MCID; EQ-5D-5L

Funding

  1. National Health Research Institutes [NHRI-EX104-10403PI]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology [102-2628-B-182-005-MY3, 103-2314-B-182-004-MY3, 104-2314-B-002-019-MY3]
  3. Healthy Ageing Research Center at Chang Gung University [EMRPD1E1711]
  4. Chang Gung Memorial Hospital in Taiwan [CMRPD1B0332, CMRPD1C0403]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To examine the criterion validity, responsiveness, and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the EuroQoL 5-Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and visual analog scale (EQ-VAS) in people receiving rehabilitation after stroke. The EQ-5D-5L, along with four criterion measures-the Medical Research Council scales for muscle strength, the Fugl-Meyer assessment, the functional independence measure, and the Stroke Impact Scale-was administered to 65 patients with stroke before and after 3- to 4-week therapy. Criterion validity was estimated using the Spearman correlation coefficient. Responsiveness was analyzed by the effect size, standardized response mean (SRM), and criterion responsiveness. The MCID was determined by anchor-based and distribution-based approaches. The percentage of patients exceeding the MCID was also reported. Concurrent validity of the EQ-Index was better compared with the EQ-VAS. The EQ-Index has better power for predicting the rehabilitation outcome in the activities of daily living than other motor-related outcome measures. The EQ-Index was moderately responsive to change (SRM = 0.63), whereas the EQ-VAS was only mildly responsive to change. The MCID estimation of the EQ-Index (the percentage of patients exceeding the MCID) was 0.10 (33.8 %) and 0.10 (33.8 %) based on the anchor-based and distribution-based approaches, respectively, and the estimation of EQ-VAS was 8.61 (41.5 %) and 10.82 (32.3 %). The EQ-Index has shown reasonable concurrent validity, limited predictive validity, and acceptable responsiveness for detecting the health-related quality of life in stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation, but not for EQ-VAS. Future research considering different recovery stages after stroke is warranted to validate these estimations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available