263
Views
8
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Mental Health

Health related quality of life in adults with asthma: a systematic review to identify the values of EQ-5D-5L instrument

, PhD, , PhD, , PhD, , PhD, , PhD & , PhD
Pages 1203-1212 | Received 09 Feb 2021, Accepted 10 Apr 2021, Published online: 08 May 2021
 

Abstract

Introduction

The EQ-5D is the most popular generic preference-based instrument used for asthma patients. This study aims to explore the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L instrument in patients with asthma and identify the EQ-5D-5L scores in these patients.

Method

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar and CEA Registry were searched with English language from 2009 until April 2020. Retrieved studies were checked against the inclusion criteria. Reference lists of the included articles were also reviewed. The quality of included articles was evaluated using Mitton checklist and the data were extracted by a reviewer and were checked by a second reviewer. Meta-analysis was done to calculate the overall scores based on type of asthma control.

Results

A total of 17 articles were included. The EQ-5D-5L scores ranged from 0.45 to 0.93 and the VAS scores ranged from 35.67 to 83.80. The EQ-5D-5L is higher in well-controlled (0.88, 95% CI: 0.81–0.96, P = 0.0001) than partly controlled (0.80, 95% CI: 0.74–0.85, P = 0.001) and poorly controlled asthma (0.72, 95% CI: 0.67–0.77, P = 0.01). Validity in two studies was weak and, in other studies, it was moderate to strong. Responsiveness of the EQ-5D-5L, that was shown in a study, was less than other generic instruments, and reliability was adequate in only study that had been reported. Ceiling effects were between 8.30% to 35%.

Conclusion

Higher score of the EQ-5D-5L was consistent with well-controlled asthma patients and those with lower severity of asthma. The assessment of psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L needs further observations.

Disclosure statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Compliance with ethical standards

This report is part of a PhD project that was approved by the ethics committee of Tehran University of Medical Sciences, approval number: IR.TUMS.VCR.REC.1398.058

Additional information

Funding

The article was funded by Tehran University of Medical Sciences, registration number: 9421434004.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.