Validity of the EuroQoL (EQ-5D) Instrument in a Greek General Population

Transcription

1 Volume 11 Number VALUE IN HEALTH Validity of the EuroQoL (EQ-5D) Instrument in a Greek General Population Nick Kontodimopoulos, PhD, 1 Evelina Pappa, PhD, 1 Dimitris Niakas, PhD, 1 John Yfantopoulos, PhD, 2 Christina Dimitrakaki, PhD, 3 Yannis Tountas, MD, PhD 3 1 Hellenic Open University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Patras, Greece; 2 National Center for Social Research, Athens, Greece; 3 Center for Health Services Research, Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, University of Athens, Athens, Greece ABSTRACT Objectives: The main purpose of this study was to assess the construct validity of the Greek EQ-5D instrument in measuring health-related quality of life, as well as to address the issues of concurrent validity, internal consistency reliability, and sensitivity. Methods: A stratified, representative sample (n = 1388) of the Greek general population was approached for interview (response rate 72.4%). The survey included the EQ-5D, the SF-36, and questions on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the sample. Results: The EQ-5D dimensions, the EQ visual analog scale, and the UK-based utility index were capable of distinguishing between groups of respondents, in the expected manner, on the basis of sex, age, education, socioeconomic status, selfreported health problems, and health services utilization, thus providing evidence of construct validity. Convergent and divergent validity of the EQ-5D descriptive system were supported by expected relationships with SF-36 scale and summary scores. Additionally, reporting a problem in a given EQ dimension was generally associated with lower SF-36 scores, supporting concurrent validity. Internal consistency reliability and sensitivity were also satisfactorily demonstrated. Conclusions: The results provide initial support for the construct validity of the EQ-5D in Greece, and, in conjunction to future studies addressing test retest reliability and responsiveness, they support administering the instrument in health status studies, which in turn can contribute to transnational comparisons. Keywords: construct validity, EQ-5D, Greece, health-related quality of life, SF-36. Introduction There is an increasing interest in instruments used to measure health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in general population surveys, as well as across a variety of diseases and conditions. Although disease-specific instruments have an essential role in measuring disease-related aspects, generic ones are generally more capable of capturing the overall impact of a disease, as well as the benefits of treatment [1]. Generic instruments are classified as either health profiles that measure health across a number of dimensions interpreted separately, or as multiattribute health status systems from which a single index is computed. The latter, having a clear basis on expected utility theory, reflect preferences for health states, weighted either by patients or the general population, and are predominantly exploited in cost-utility analyzes [2,3]. The EuroQol EQ-5D is a two-part, generic, preference-based measure of HRQOL developed by a Address correspondence to: Nick Kontodimopoulos, Faculty of Social Sciences, Hellenic Open University, Riga Fereou 169 & Tsamadou, Patras 26222, Greece. nkontodi@otenet.gr /j x multidisciplinary consortium of investigators from five European countries [4]. The initial version of the instrument addressed six domains, but was later revised to include five: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/ discomfort, and anxiety/depression [5,6]. Each domain is divided into three severity levels, corresponding to no problem, some problem, and extreme problem. A dimension for which there are no problems is said to be at level 1, while a dimension for which there are extreme problems is said to be at level 3. Combining one level from each domain results in defining 243 different health states ranging from (perfect health) to (worst health), and it is possible to obtain social values for each, thereby generating a tariff of health state valuations [7,8]. The second part of the EQ-5D consists of a vertical 0 to 100 visual analog scale (VAS), with 0 and 100 representing the worst and best imaginable health states, respectively. The subject marks a point on the scale to reflect overall health on the day of the interview, hence providing a single global rating of self-perceived health. The EuroQol Group has closely monitored the translation of the EQ-5D into most major languages, and the instrument is currently being used in many , International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) /08/

2 Greek EQ-5D Construct Validity 1163 different countries in a variety of clinical areas and evaluation programs, as well as in health policy formulation [9]. The instrument has been translated into Greek as well, and initial evidence on its applicability and adaptability to the Greek environment has been provided [10]. The aim of this study was to crosssectionally examine, in a large and representative sample of the Greek general population, the construct validity of the three components of the EQ-5D: the descriptive system, the VAS, and the utility index (derived from time trade-off valuations from a general UK population [7,8]). Construct validity will be addressed via the accumulation of evidence on known groups validity, convergent, and divergent validity. Moreover, the issues of concurrent validity, internal consistency reliability, and sensitivity will also be investigated. The results are expected to support equivalence of metrics and meaning [11] with the original English version, and increase confidence in using the instrument in Greek studies, thus contributing to cross-cultural HRQOL comparisons. Methods Sample and Data Collection The study was conducted in September 2006 and involved a sample (>18 years old) residing in urban (>2000 inhabitants) and rural (<2000 inhabitants) areas of the country and in each of the 13 geographic regions. According to the latest Population Census (2001), the survey population consisted of approximately 8,880,924 individuals. Non fluent Greek speakers, institutionalized subjects, and those incapable of reasoning and decision-making on their own were excluded. Participants were grouped, proportionally to the Greek population, by sociodemographic characteristics according to a three-staged sampling methodology. In the first stage, a random sample of building blocks was selected proportionally to size. In the second, households were randomly selected by systematic sampling. In the third stage, an eligible participant was selected by simple random sampling in each household. In total, 1005 willing subjects out of 1388 initially approached (response rate 72.4%) agreed to participate and were interviewed by trained interviewers. The Research Committee of the Hellenic Open University ethically approved the study, and all subjects provided informed consent. Survey The instruments used to measure HRQOL in this study were the EQ-5D and the SF-36 (Greek version 1.0, standard 4-week recall). The SF-36 is a generic HRQOL assessment instrument that includes eight dimensions: physical functioning (PF), role physical (RP), bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), vitality (VT), social functioning (SF), role emotional (RE), and mental health (MH) [12], and reliability and validity of the Greek version have been previously demonstrated [13,14]. Each dimension is scored on a 0 to 100 scale, with 0 and 100 corresponding to worst and best HRQOL, respectively [15], and the eight dimensions can be summarized in two summary scores of physical and mental health [16]. Subjects reported information on sociodemographic variables such as sex, age, marital status, education, and employment, with the latter two serving as proxy-estimators of socioeconomic status, because information on income was not available. Self-reported clinical conditions were also recorded, as this technique has been previously reported as reliable [17,18]. This survey focused on diabetes, hypertension, heart problems, asthma, hip/knee problems, depression, sleeping disorders, and obesity (BMI > 30). Furthermore, utilization of health services such as past-month physician consultations and past-year hospital admissions were recorded, as they have also been shown to be associated with HRQOL [19,20]. Psychometric Properties The sensitivity of the EQ-5D refers to the extent to which the full range of health states is defined, as well as to floor and ceiling effects. Internal consistency reliability was estimated via Cronbach s alpha coefficient. Construct validity was assessed by examining hypothesized relationships between sociodemographic and clinical variables and EQ-5D scores, which have been previously reported in the literature. Specifically, it was expected that females, older subjects, persons widowed or divorced, those with a lower educational status, and the unemployed would report poorer health [21 23]. It was also logical to expect that those reporting greater use of health services and existing clinical conditions would also score lower on all three components of the EQ-5D [24,25]. The ability of the EQ-5D to discriminate between different levels of health was determined by comparing mean SF-36 scale and summary scores for subjects reporting no problem, for a given EQ dimension as opposed to reporting any problem, and it was expected that the mean SF-36 scores would be higher in the first case [26]. Convergent and divergent validity were tested by examining relationships with the Greek SF-36, and it was expected that comparable dimensions, e.g., EQ-5D mobility and SF-36 physical functioning, would correlate better, compared with less comparable dimensions, such as EQ-5D anxiety/ depression and SF-36 physical functioning. Contrarily, the EQ VAS and index should correlate reasonably well with all SF-36 dimensions of health [27].

3 1164 Kontodimopoulos et al. Table 1 Frequency distribution of the 20 most reported EQ-5D health profiles with mean index and VAS values EQ-5D profile N % Cumulative % Mean EQ index Mean EQ VAS EQ VAS, EuroQol Visual Analog Scale. Statistical Analysis Data were analyzed using SPSS version 13.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago IL). The c 2 (chi-square) and Mann Whitney tests were used to examine differences in frequencies between categories and in average ranks, respectively, and the Kruskal Wallis test for differences in average ranks between groups differing in key variables. The Spearman correlation coefficient was used to measure the association between EQ dimensions, EQ index and EQ VAS, and SF-36 subscale and summary scores, and correlations >0.50 were regarded as strong [28]. Odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) were used to estimate the association between reporting a problem on the EQ-5D descriptive system and the presence of a chronic disease or condition. Subgroup mean scores were adjusted for age and sex because these particular variables are potential confounders. For all tests, statistical significance was assumed for P-values < Results Approximately one fourth of the health states generated by the EQ-5D descriptive system were reported by the respondents (60 out of 243). Forty-three percent of the sample rated their health state as (ceiling), implying no problems in any dimension, and only one person reported the most dysfunctional state (floor). Subjects reporting the best state were mostly male, younger, and of higher educational status (results not shown). Table 1, ranked in order of decreasing health according to the EQ index, shows the 20 most frequently reported health states, cumulatively accounting for 93.3% of the sample. It is evident that lower mean EQ index and VAS values correspond to poorer health states reported on the EQ-5D descriptive system. Individuals rating themselves as 11111, assigned a mean score of to their health state on the EQ VAS, implying relatively high sensitivity, although it is also possible that minor health problems are not sufficiently recorded. Internal consistency reliability of the EQ-5D was good with Cronbach s alpha (a =0.743), exceeding the recommended 0.70 standard for group-level comparisons [29]. Table 2 shows the percentage of individuals reporting problems in each of the EQ-5D dimensions and mean EQ index and VAS values according to sociodemographic and clinical variables. The mean EQ-5D index and EQ VAS scores (SD) were 0.80 (0.27) and (20.49), respectively, whereas the Spearman correlation coefficient between the two was 0.62 (P < 0.001). Anxiety/depression was the most frequently reported problem (43.5% of the sample), and self-care was the least frequently declared problem (5.0%). Pain/discomfort was reported by 33.4% of the sample. Higher percentages of women reported problems on all the EQ-5D dimensions and rated their health as worse on the VAS (72.81 vs for men, P < 0.001). These differences are reflected in the assigned tariff values (0.76 vs. 0.84, respectively, P < 0.001). Older respondents were more likely to report problems in all EQ-5D dimensions, and to rate their health lower on the VAS (Kruskal Wallis, P < 0.001), although in the self-care and anxiety/depression dimensions, higher percentages were observed for the 55 to 64 group (and not 65). The proxy indicators of socioeconomic status (i.e., employment and more years of education) were, as expected, associated with the absence of problems in the EQ dimensions, and with higher scores in the EQ-index and EQ-VAS, implying that high socioeconomic status was positively

4 Greek EQ-5D Construct Validity 1165 Table 2 Responses to EQ-5D by sociodemographic and clinical variables % reporting a moderate or severe problem Usual Self-care activities Pain/discomfort Anxiety/depression Variable N (%) Mobility EQ index Mean (SD) EQ VAS Mean (SD) Total sample 1005 (100) (0.27) (20.49) Sex * ** *** *** *** *** Male 483 (48.1) (0.23) (19.55) Female 522 (51.9) (0.29) (21.10) Age (years) *** *** *** *** *** *** *** (11.4) (0.13) (9.63) (18.4) (0.15) (15.09) (17.9) (0.22) (17.25) (15.0) (0.25) (18.34) (15.0) (0.31) (20.96) (22.3) (0.31) (21.57) Education *** *** *** *** *** *** *** <9 years 334 (33.2) (0.31) (22.46) 9 12 years 422 (42.0) (0.23) (17.28) >12 years 249 (24.8) (0.19) (18.30 Marital status *** ** *** *** *** *** *** Single 244 (24.3) (0.21) (16.30) Married 646 (64.3) (0.25) (20.21) Divorced/widowed 115 (11.4) (0.33) (23.00) Employment *** *** *** *** ** *** *** Working 499 (49.7) (0.20) (15.84) Retired 227 (22.6) (0.32) (22.38) Housekeeping 177 (17.6) (0.30) (21.58) Student 67 (6.6) (0.14) (12.92) Unemployed 35 (3.5) (0.30) (23.78) Chronic disease (one or more) *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Yes 360 (35.8) (0.31) (21.00) No 645 (64.2) (0.20) (16.98) Physician visit (past month) *** *** *** *** * *** *** Yes 297 (29.6) (0.32) (21.94) No 702 (69.9) (0.22) (18.51) Hospitalization (past year) *** *** *** *** * *** *** None 880 (87.6) (0.25) (19.63) Once 85 (8.5) (0.33) (20.91) >Once 30 (3.0) (0.32) (26.58) *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < c 2 (chi-square) tests performed for EQ-5D dimensions. Mann Whitney and Kruskal Wallis tests performed for EQ index and EQ VAS. EQ VAS, EuroQoL Visual Analog Scale. related to HRQOL. The highest percentages of reporting a moderate or severe problem in the EQ-5D dimensions were observed in the group of retired respondents, and this is most likely because age, and perhaps clinical conditions, acting as covariates. Furthermore, being divorced/widowed (Kruskal Wallis, P < 0.001), suffering from a clinical condition (Mann Whitney, P < 0.001), last-month physician consultations (Mann Whitney, P < 0.001), and past-year hospital admissions (Kruskal Wallis, P < 0.001) all correlated positively with lower VAS and index values and with higher percentages of reported problems. With respect to the clinical conditions reported by the subjects, all of them (except for heart problem) were significantly associated with increased odds of reporting a problem in at least one EQ-5D dimension, after adjusting for age and sex (Table 3). In particular, sleeping disorders and obesity were the ones with the greatest impact on mobility, usual activities, and pain/ discomfort. Subjects with hip/knee problems were 3.5 times more likely to note a problem in the EQ dimension pain/discomfort, and those suffering from depression were 6.5 times more likely to report a problem in the EQ-5D dimension anxiety/depression, clearly marking the expected strong association between the two. Having diabetes resulted in significantly higher odds of reporting problems in the EQ-5D mobility and usual activities dimensions, whereas hypertension meant higher odds of reporting impairments in the two aforementioned dimensions and in pain/discomfort as well. Finally, asthma was linked to a 4.2 times higher probability of reporting problems in everyday activities. The existence of these clinical conditions also resulted in decrements in age and sex-adjusted EQ index and EQ VAS scores, with sleeping disorders generating the most noteworthy differences, namely 0.16 (P < 0.001) and 13.2 (P < 0.01), respectively. By contrary, hip/knee problems produced the smallest EQ index and VAS decrease after adjustment, implying that this condition is age-related. The discriminatory ability of the EQ-5D was tested by comparing SF-36 scale and summary scores for

5 1166 Kontodimopoulos et al. Table 3 The effects of self-reported health problems on EQ dimensions, EQ index, and EQ VAS Variable (condition) % N Odds ratio (95%) of reporting a problem* Difference in mean scores* Mobility Self-care Usual activities Pain/discomfort Anxiety/depression EQ index EQ VAS Diabetes ( ) 1.2 ( ) 2.5 ( ) 1.7 ( ) 1.2 ( ) No diabetes 93.8 ** ** ** ** Hypertension ( ) 1.5 ( ) 2.1 ( ) 1.8 ( ) 1.3 ( ) No hypertension 86.7 *** *** ** * *** Heart problem ( ) 2.2 ( ) 1.5 ( ) 1.7 ( ) 1.0 ( ) No heart problem 98.4 Asthma ( ) 3.7 ( ) 4.2 ( ) 2.7 ( ) 1.4 ( ) No asthma 98.5 * Hip/knee problem ( ) 1.0 ( ) 1.1 ( ) 3.5 ( ) 2.0 ( ) No hip/knee problem 97.5 ** * Depression ( ) 0.8 ( ) 1.8 ( ) 2.1 ( ) 6.5 ( ) No depression 97.6 * *** * Sleeping disorders ( ) 2.9 ( ) 4.5 ( ) 4.0 ( ) 3.7 ( ) No sleeping disorder 74.7 *** ** *** *** *** *** ** Obesity (BMI > 30) ( ) 1.7 ( ) 2.3 ( ) 2.0 ( ) 1.3 ( ) No obesity 81.6 *** *** *** ** *** *** *Adjusted for sex and age. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < Mann Whitney tests performed for EQ index and EQ VAS. EQ VAS, EuroQoL Visual Analog Scale; BMI, body mass index. subjects reporting no problems, for each of the EQ-5D dimensions, with subjects reporting any problems (Table 4). As expected, scores were significantly different (P < for all, except EQ self-care and SF-36 MCS, where P < 0.05). The Spearman rank correlation coefficients (Table 5) between SF-36 scale and summary scores and EQ-5D dimensions, index, and VAS were high between dimensions expected to correlate well. For example, r=-0.66 between SF-36 RP and EQ-5D usual activities, r=-0.65 between SF-36 BP and EQ-5D pain discomfort, and r=-0.65 between SF-36 PF and EQ-5D mobility, just to mention a few, implying high convergent validity. On the other hand, dimensions expected to be less comparable demonstrated divergent validity by correlating weakly. In particular, r=-0.29 between SF-36 MH and EQ-5D mobility, r=-0.28 between SF-36 RP and EQ-5D anxiety/depression, and r=-0.23 between SF-36 SF and EQ-5D self-care. Finally, EQ index and VAS scores correlated fairly well, as hypothesized, with all SF-36 scale and summary scores. Discussion The adaptability of the EQ-5D to the Greek environment and the basic measurement properties of the instrument have been previously demonstrated [10]. This study reports on the first application in a large and representative sample of the Greek population, and on the first extensive evaluation of its basic psychometric properties. Initial evidence has been provided on construct and concurrent validity, reliability, and sensitivity Table 4 SF-36 mean scores by EQ-5D response EQ-5D N SF-36 subscales SF-36 summaries PF RP BP GH VT SF RE MH PCS MCS Mobility ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** No problems Any problems Self-care ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** * No problems Any problems Usual activities ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** No problems Any problems Pain/discomfort ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** No problems Any problems Anxiety/depression ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** No problems Any problems *P < 0.05, **P < according to Mann Whitney test. BP, Bodily Pain; EQVAS, EuroQoLVisualAnalog Scale; GH, General Health; MCS, Mental Component Summary; MH, Mental Health; PCS, Physical Component Summary; PF, Physical Functioning; RE, Role Emotional; RP, Role Physical; SF, Social Functioning; SF-36, Short Form 36;VT,Vitality.

6 Greek EQ-5D Construct Validity 1167 Table 5 Correlations (Spearman) between SF-36 scales and summaries and EQ-5D dimensions, index, and VAS EQ-5D dimensions Mobility Self-care Usual activities Pain/discomfort Anxiety/depression SF-36 subscales EQ index EQ VAS PF -0.65** -0.36** -0.64** -0.61** -0.33** 0.65** 0.62** RP -0.62** -0.27** -0.66** -0.54** -0.28** 0.56** 0.57** BP -0.50** -0.22** -0.52** -0.65** -0.32** 0.61** 0.56** GH -0.53** -0.25** -0.54** -0.55** -0.33** 0.58** 0.66** VT -0.48** -0.24** -0.49** -0.52** -0.42** 0.62** 0.61** SF -0.49** -0.23** -0.53** -0.51** -0.41** 0.61** 0.52** RE -0.38** -0.19** -0.44** -0.36** -0.37** 0.47** 0.41** MH -0.29** -0.12** -0.29** -0.35** -0.43** 0.47** 0.41** SF-36 summaries PCS -0.59** -0.31** -0.61** -0.63** -0.24** 0.58** 0.63** MCS -0.23** -0.08* -0.26** -0.32** -0.46** 0.47** 0.39** Strong correlations ( 0.50) indicated in bold. *P < 0.05, **P < BP, Bodily Pain; EQVAS, EuroQoLVisualAnalog Scale; GH, General Health; MCS, Mental Component Summary; MH, Mental Health; PCS, Physical Component Summary; PF, Physical Functioning; RE, Role Emotional; RP, Role Physical; SF, Social Functioning; SF-36, Short Form 36;VT,Vitality. of the instrument, supported by self-reported data on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. This implies that the EQ-5D is potentially suitable for inclusion in large-scale health surveys in Greece, for providing HRQOL data to be used for calculating quality adjusted life years (QALYs) in cost-utility studies, and for cross-cultural quality of life comparisons. The EQ-5D multiattribute system is limited to three response levels in each dimension, and this could impose a significant ceiling effect on health status assessment among relatively healthy people. In this study, 43% of the sample did not report any problems on the EQ-5D (health profile 11111), with a wide range of SF-36 scores observed for this particular group. Although central tendency of health status in a general population may be expected to be in the direction of good health, the discriminative ability of the EQ-5D (compared to the SF-36) is limited, and this has been recognized in several studies [23,24,26,30], and may limit the application of the EQ-5D in general population surveys. Available evidence from comparisons of SF-36 and EQ-5D in disease populations suggests that this is not as much of a limitation [31 33]. The EQ-5D dimensions, index, and VAS were able to distinguish between groups of respondents in the expected manner (known-groups validity) on the basis of sex, age, socioeconomic status, self-reported health problems, and health services utilization (as a proxy of HRQOL), providing evidence of its construct validity. Furthermore, scores on the Eqindex derived by the time trade-off from a UK population were higher than scores on the VAS, and this has been observed in many previous studies [23,34,35]. Convergent and divergent validity of the EQ-5D descriptive system was supported by confirmation of expected relationships with the SF-36 scale and summary scores. Additionally, reporting a problem with a given EQ dimension was generally associated with lower SF-36 scores. Health conditions, which are known to be reliable when self-reported, had an effect on EQ dimensions, index, and VAS. In particular, subjects suffering from diabetes, hypertension, heart problems, asthma, hip/ knee problems, depression, sleeping disorders, or obesity were more likely to report a problem in the EQ dimensions and lower VAS values, after adjustment for age and sex. Similar results have been reported in other general population studies and support EQ-5D construct validity [24,25,27]. A proportion of subjects had more than one of the above-mentioned conditions, but most multimorbid groups were small, and it was chosen to study each condition individually to obtain adequate sample sizes. These health conditions generated expected differences in EQ index scores as well. This offers support to previous assertions that valuations for a standard set of EuroQol health states are broadly similar in different countries, suggesting crosscultural applicability [36,37]. Nevertheless, it should be noted that other EQ-5D valuation studies have reported preferences differing from those of the UK population [38], and hence future efforts could be focused on obtaining a Greek tariff as well. All SF-36 scale scores differ significantly between subjects grouped by their responses to the EQ-5D. Differences in SF-36 scores, between comparable dimensions of the EQ-5D and the SF-36, were expectedly larger than between noncomparable ones, implying good concurrent validity of the EQ-5D. With respect to correlations between SF-36 scales and EQ-5D dimensions, the only unexpected result was the correlation between SF-36 mental health and EQ- 5D anxiety/depression, which, although significant, was weaker than what might have been expected (r =-0.43). Furthermore, the fact that EQ-5D response categories are very limited, in comparison with the SF-36, is an acknowledged problem, for which the proposed solution is to use a separate disease-specific instrument, alongside the generic EQ-5D, if more information about health domains is required [39]. For use in economic evaluations, however, the observed concurrent validity of the

7 1168 Kontodimopoulos et al. EQ-5D is satisfactory, especially in view of the highly significant positive correlation between the EQ-5D index and the SF-36 scores. This study has some limitations that should be taken into account. Although cross-sectional construct validity, as well as internal consistency reliability and sensitivity of the Greek EuroQol EQ-5D have been fairly demonstrated, other issues such as test retest reliability, longitudinal construct validity, and responsiveness have not been addressed. This is particularly important because health status changes over time, and the instrument should be able to detect these changes, particularly those of clinical importance. Furthermore, as the literature on the use of preferencebased instruments in Greece is extremely scarce, future studies are required to compare the EQ-5D with other measures such as the SF-6D, derived from the SF-36 [40]. Furthermore, clinical conditions were selfreported, and it has been shown that the reliance on such data may result in biased estimates of the prevalence of some conditions [41]. Moreover, significant differences have been found between self-reported and measured anthropometric indexes in young Greek study participants [42] that might lead to erroneous estimations of obesity. Regarding hypertension, 39% of Greek hypertensives are unaware of their health problem [43]. In conclusion, the EQ-5D descriptive system, the EQ VAS, and the UK population-based index have demonstrated construct validity in a large and representative sample of the Greek general population. The EQ components have been shown to discriminate well between subgroups differing in sociodemographic and health-related characteristics. Correlations between the EQ-5D and the validated Greek SF-36 provided evidence of convergent and divergent validity. The relatively large ceiling effect, implying perhaps moderate sensitivity, has to be taken into consideration when administering the EQ-5D to large samples from the general population. Nevertheless, this potential disadvantage is balanced by the instrument s brevity, ease of use, and the existence of tariffs for use in cost-utility analyzes. Source of financial support: None. References 1 Lambert CM, Hurst NP. Health economics as an aspect of health outcome: basic principles and application in rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol 1995;34: Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC. Costeffectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, Drummond MF, O Brien B, Stoddard GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, The EuroQol group. EuroQol a new facility for the measurement of health related quality of life. Health Policy 1990;16: Essink-Bot ML, Stouthard ME, Bonsel GJ. Generalizability of valuations on health states collected with the EuroQol questionnaire. Health Econ 1993;2: Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996;37: Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A. A Social Tariff for EuroQol: Results from a UK General Population Survey. Discussion Paper 138. York: University of York, Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A. The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Econ 1996;5: Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med 2001; 33: Yfantopoulos J. The Greek version of the EuroQol (EQ-5D) instrument. Arch Hell Med 2001;18: Herdman M, Fox-Rushby J, Badia X. Equivalence and the translation and adaptation of health-related quality of life questionnaires. Qual Life Res 1997; 6: Ware JE, Sherbourne CD, The MOS. 36-item Short- Form Health Survey (SF-36). Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30: Pappa E, Kontodimopoulos N, Niakas D. Validating and norming of the Greek SF-36 Health Survey. Qual Life Res 2005;14: Anagnostopoulos F, Niakas D, Pappa E. Construct validation of the Greek SF-36 Health Survey. Qual Life Res 2005;14: Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B. SF-36 Health Survey Manual and Interpretation Guide. Boston: New England Medical Center, Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales: A User s Manual. Boston: New England Medical Center, Franks P, Gold MR, Fiscella K. Sociodemographics, self-rated health, and mortality in the US. Soc Sci Med 2003;56: Jiang Y, Hesser JE. Associations between healthrelated quality of life and demographics and health risks. Results from Rhode Island s 2002 behavioral risk factor survey. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006;4: Lam CL, Fong DY, Lauder I, Lam TP. The effect of health related quality of life (HRQOL) on health services utilization of a Chinese population. Soc Sci Med 2002;55: Pappa E, Niakas D. Assessment of health care needs and utilization in a mixed public-private system: the case of the Athens area. BMC Health Serv Res 2006;6: Johnson JA, Coons SJ. Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 in an adult US sample. Qual Life Res 1998;7:

8 Greek EQ-5D Construct Validity Kind P, Dolan P, Gudex C, Williams A. Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. BMJ 1998; 316: Johnson JA, Pickard AS. Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 health surveys in a general population survey in Alberta. Can Med Care 2000;38: Badia X, Schiaffino A, Alonso J, Herdman M. Using the EuroQol 5D in the Catalan general population: feasibility and construct validity. Qual Life Res 1998;7: Savoia E, Fantini MP, Pandolfi PP, et al. Assessing the construct validity of the Italian version of the EQ-5D: preliminary results from a cross-sectional study in North Italy. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006;4: Brazier J, Jones N, Kind P. Testing the validity of the Euroqol and comparing it with the SF-36 health survey questionnaire. Qual Life Res 1993;2: Lubetkin EI, Jia H, Gold MR. Construct validity of the EQ-5D in low-income Chinese American primary care patients. Qual Life Res 2004;13: Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull 1992; 112: Nunnaly JC, Bernstein IR. Psychometric Theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, Essink-Bot ML, Krabbe PF, Gouke JB, Aaronson NK. An empirical comparison of four generic health status measures. The Nottingham health profile, the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item short-form health survey, the COOP/WONCA charts, and the EuroQol instrument. Med Care 1997;35: Hollingworth W, MacKenzie R, Todd CJ, Dixon AK. Measuring changes in quality of life following magnetic resonance imaging of the knee: SF-36, EuroQol or Rosser index? Qual Life Res 1995;4: Harper R, Brazier JE, Waterhouse JC, et al. Comparison of outcome measures for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in an outpatient setting. Thorax 1997;52: Jenkinson C, Stradling J, Petersen S. Comparison of three measures of quality of life outcome in the evaluation of continuous positive airways pressure therapy for sleep apnoea. J Sleep Res 1997;6: Revicki D. Relationship between health utility and psychometric health status measures. Med Care 1992;30(5 Suppl.): O Leary JF, Fairclough DL, Jankowski MK, Weeks JC. Comparison of time trade-off utilities and rating scale values of cancer patients and their relatives: evidence for a possible plateau relationship. Med Decis Making 1995;15: Hisashige A, Mikasa H, Katayama T. Description and valuation of health-related quality of life among the general public in Japan by the EuroQol. J Med Invest 1998;45: Johnson JA, Coons SJ, Ergo A, Szava-Kovats G. Valuation of EuroQOL (EQ-5D) health states in an adult US sample. Pharmacoeconomics 1998;13: Tsuchiya A, Ikeda S, Ikegami N, et al. Estimating an EQ-5D population value set: the case of Japan. Health Econ 2002;11: Cleemput I, Kesteloot K, Moons P, et al. The construct and concurrent validity of the EQ-5D in a renal transplant population. Value Health 2004;7: Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002;21: Lubetkin EI, Jia H, Franks P, Gold MR. Relationship among sociodemographic factors, clinical conditions, and health-related quality of life: examining the EQ-5D in the U.S. general population. Qual Life Res 2005;14: Tokmakidis SP, Christodoulos AD, Mantzouranis NI. Validity of self-reported anthropometric values used to assess body mass index and estimate obesity in Greek school children. J Adolesc Health 2007; 40: Stergiou GS, Thomopoulou GC, Skeva II, Mountokalakis TD. Prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension in Greece: the Didima study. Am J Hypertens 1999;12: