Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Paul Kind Centre for Health Economics, University of
York, York YO1 5DD
Correspondence to: Dr Kind pk1{at}york.ac.uk
Objective: To measure the health of a representative
sample of the population of the United Kingdom by using the EuroQoL EQ-5D questionnaire.
The measurement of health is central to the evaluation of health
care. By observing the extent of changes in health the benefits and
disbenefits of health care for both patients and groups of patients can
be evaluated; over the past 25 years several generic measures of health
have been developed for use in this way.1-8 These
instruments were designed for use as general purpose measures of
health, independent of diagnostic categorisation or disease severity.
Information based on such measures is useful for establishing the
degrees of morbidity in the community, enabling different population
subgroups to be compared, which would help in assessing health needs or
in informing those responsible for allocating health resources.
Periodic reassessment of health could provide important data on the
extent of any changes in the health of a population We report on a study in which the EuroQoL EQ-5D
questionnaire9 was fielded in a survey of the population
of the United Kingdom, conducted as part of a wider study of practical
ways of measuring health related quality of life.10
EQ-5D questionnaire
Survey design and methods
![]()
Abstract
Top
Abstract
References
Design: Stratified random sample representative of
the general population aged 18 and over and living in the community.
Setting: United Kingdom.
Subjects: 3395 people resident in the United Kingdom.
Main outcome measures: Average values for mobility,
self care, usual activities, pain or discomfort, and anxiety or depression.
Results: One in three respondents reported problems
with pain or discomfort. There were differences in the perception of
health according to the respondent's age, social class, education, housing tenure, economic position, and smoking behaviour.
Conclusions: The EQ-5D questionnaire is a
practical way of measuring the health of a population and of detecting
differences in subgroups of the population.
Key messages
![]()
Introduction
for example, the
extent to which the population is achieving national targets for
health. If such standardised information was also routinely collected
on individual patients it would provide a simple means of evaluating
the outcomes of their health care.
![]()
Subjects and methods
The EQ-5D questionnaire is a generic measure of health status
developed by the EuroQoL Group, an international research network established in 1987 by researchers from Finland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. The EQ-5D questionnaire defines health
in terms of five dimensions: mobility, self care, usual activities
(work, study, housework, family, or leisure), pain or discomfort, and
anxiety or depression. Each dimension is subdivided into three
categories, which indicate whether the respondent has no problem, a
moderate problem, or an extreme problem (appendix). Combinations of
these categories define a total of 243 health states. The EQ-5D
questionnaire comprises two pages; on the first page respondents record
the extent of their problem in each of the five dimensions and on the
second page they record their perception of their overall health on a
visual analogue scale (0 denoting the worst imaginable health state and
100 denoting the best imaginable health state). The validity and
reliability of the EQ-5D questionnaire have been
tested,11-13 as has its application in a range of patient groups.14-16 Since the original survey reported here, the
EQ-5D questionnaire has been fielded in three national surveys,
including the English national health survey
an interview-based survey
of about 16 000 people. The EQ-5D questionnaire has also been used in
population surveys in Spain, Germany, and Canada.
Members of the public aged 18 and over were interviewed as part of
a national survey. No upper age limit was stipulated. The sample was
based on addresses in England, Scotland, and Wales, selected by
postcode.17 Eighty postcode areas were chosen,
proportionately to the number of addresses in each area, after these
areas had been stratified by regional health authority, socioeconomic
group, and population density. Seventy six addresses were selected from each postcode area, yielding a total of 6080 addresses. At each of
these addresses one adult aged 18 or over was selected using a Kish
grid.18 Individuals in institutions, hostels, care homes, or bed and breakfast accommodation were excluded from the sample. Of
the selected addresses, 12% were unproductive as they were non-residential, empty, or untraceable. The final sample comprising 3395 subjects was representative of the general population with respect
to age, sex, and social class. During the interview, respondents completed the EQ-5D questionnaire and provided information on age, sex,
marital state, education, employment, housing tenure, and smoking
behaviour. The interviews took place during the last quarter of 1993.
2 Tests
were used for the analysis of the descriptive profile data, and
Student's t test was used to test for subgroup
differences in the visual analogue scale data.
| |
Results |
|---|
A moderate problem on at least one dimension was reported by 42% of respondents, whereas only 6% of respondents reported any extreme problem (table 1). Problems were most often recorded in the pain or discomfort dimension. In subsequent analyses, moderate and extreme categories of each dimension were combined.
|
The mean state of health recorded on the visual analogue scale was 82.5 (SD 17).
Health and age
The rates of reported problems increased significantly
with age (P<0.001) for all dimensions (table 2); an exception to this general pattern was the anxiety/depression dimension, which peaked at
28% of respondents aged 60 to 69 and then decreased slightly.
|
50 (P<0.001).
Health and sex
Women aged
70 tended to report higher rates of problems than
did men of the same age (table 2). A systematic difference in rates was
found across all age groups on the anxiety/depression dimension, with
women reporting significantly higher rates than men (P<0.05). No
significant differences were found in the visual analogue scale scores
for men and women.
|
Health and marital status
Respondents who were widowed, separated, or divorced reported
significantly more problems on all five dimensions (P<0.001). Scores
on the visual analogue scale for this group were also significantly lower than for respondents living alone or for those with a partner (means 77, 84, and 84 respectively, P<0.001).
Health and social class
After the effects of age were controlled for, there were
significant differences in the rates of reported problems when
respondents were grouped according to social class (table
3).
|
|
Health and education
When respondents were classified by education rather than by
social class, a similar pattern of differences emerged. Respondents who
had received higher or further education reported significantly lower
rates of problems with mobility (P<0.05), usual activities (P<0.05),
pain/discomfort (P<0.01), and anxiety/depression (P<0.01) than did
those who had received no education after leaving school. A similar
pattern was seen on the visual analogue scale, with significantly
higher scores reported for those who had received higher or further
education (P<0.001).
Health and economic status
Significantly higher rates of problems were reported by
respondents who were unemployed, sick or disabled, or retired, compared with those in employment or full time education (P<0.001) (table 4).
Rates of reported problems for unemployed people were almost twice
those of respondents in a salaried job.
|
Health and smoking behaviour
Respondents who smoked reported significantly higher rates of
problems than non-smokers on all dimensions. Non-smokers also recorded
significantly higher scores on the visual analogue scale than
respondents who smoked (83.4 and 80.4 respectively, P<0.001).
Analysis of variance
Analysis of variance was used to investigate the collective
influence of background variables. With the score on the visual analogue scale as the dependent variable and age as a covariate, a main
effects model indicated a significant contribution for education
(P<0.01), employment (P<0.001), and smoking behaviour (P<0.001).
Housing tenure, marital status, and social class were not significant
variables in this model.
Disability rates from other national surveys
Respondents who reported any problem in any dimension could be
distinguished from respondents who reported no problems whatsoever. This dichotomy can be used to form an arbitrary definition of disability, enabling data to be compared with the findings of other
surveys. The general household survey incorporates questions on
longstanding illness and recent interference with usual
activities.19 The responses to these questions are
combined to give rates of limiting longstanding illness which are
published annually. The disability survey by the Office of Population
Censuses and Surveys conducted in 1985 included a questionnaire
comprising 10 categories: locomotion, reaching and stretching,
dexterity, seeing, hearing, personal care, continence, communication,
behaviour, and intellectual functioning.20 The rates of
disability in people grouped into five year age groups were reported in
this survey.20 These data were plotted against disability
rates determined from our survey (fig 3). Disability rates based on
responses to the EQ-5D questionnaire were 20% to 25% higher than
rates from the general household survey for all age groups and about
30% to 40% higher than the 1985 disability survey, until the age of
80.
|
| |
Discussion |
|---|
This survey provides an important insight into the health status
of the population of the United Kingdom at any one time. Although
extreme problems with mobility and self care were rarely reported in
this survey, there was a high level of reported problems with pain or
discomfort. Over 50% of respondents aged
70 and about 20% of the
youngest respondents reported some problem in this dimension. This
finding has important implications. Pain does not seem to be a
dimension of interest in a national disability survey despite being
widely experienced in the community. The omission of a pain category
means that it is assigned a zero weight, despite good evidence that it
has a powerful influence on society's valuations of states of
health.21 These factors combine to disadvantage a
significant proportion of the general population.
Significant differences were found between population subgroups with respect to age, social class, marital status, employment, education, and smoking behaviour. These findings compare with findings reported elsewhere.22-24 Disability rates based on the EuroQoL classification reflected similar trends to those seen in the general household survey and surveys of the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys, although rates in these surveys were somewhat lower as they were based on a narrower definition of disability.
Population averages
The representativeness of the survey suggests that the
results are indicative of the average health status in the general population of the United Kingdom, although it should be borne in mind
that sampling was limited to individuals living in the community and
tended to exclude people who had extreme problems with mobility or with
self care and therefore likely to be dependent on others for their
daily needs. Current investigation of specific patient groups
for
example, people attending their general practice surgeries
reveals a
wider distribution of reported problems. Thus, to the extent that this
survey excluded people who were likely to yield responses indicating
more severe problems, the results may well underestimate the health
related quality of life of the general population.
|
Measuring outcomes
However, it is the measurement of change in health status for
which the need is greatest. There can be few circumstances in which
healthcare workers are not concerned with the measurement of outcome,
and the EQ-5D questionnaire provides the capacity to measure change in
health status, and hence outcomes, in a simple standardised way. The
information on self reported problems recorded on the first page of the
EQ-5D questionnaire identifies a unique health status for which there
is a corresponding index value based on the views of the general
population.21 Changes in health status and the value of
that change can be used to quantify outcomes for clinical and economic
evaluation; the latter role was recommended for the EQ-5D questionnaire
in a report commissioned by the United States Department of Public
Health.26 There is "an increasing consensus regarding
the centrality of the patient's point of view in monitoring medical
care outcomes,"6 and the EQ-5D questionnaire has the
obvious potential to contribute to that process. The national survey
data reported in this paper show what can be achieved by using an
uncomplicated instrument for measuring health status. The further
exploitation of its potential is open to us all.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
Survey work for the 1993 survey was conducted by Social and Community Planning Research, and we thank the trained fieldwork staff for their help in the collection of the data.
Contributors: All four authors shared equally in the design and execution of the research reported in this paper. Social and Community Planning Research provided significant additional expertise in the design and management of the national survey. PK will act as guarantor for the paper.
Funding: The project was funded by the Department of Health. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily of the Department of Health.
Conflict of interest: None.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life.
Health Policy
1990;
16:
199-208[Medline].
the current state of play.
Health Policy
1996;
37:
53-72[Medline].
a generic health status instrument
in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
Br J Rheumatol
1994;
33:
655-662(Accepted 31 October 1997)