Cargando…

How does the EQ-5D-Y Proxy version 1 perform in 3, 4 and 5-year-old children?

BACKGROUND: The EQ-5D-Y Proxy is currently recommended for Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) measurement in children aged 4–8 years of age. However, it has only been validated in children over six years of age. The aim of this study was to investigate the performance of the EQ-5D-Y proxy versio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Verstraete, Janine, Lloyd, Andrew, Scott, Des, Jelsma, Jennifer
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7247261/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32448278
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01410-3
_version_ 1783538123175624704
author Verstraete, Janine
Lloyd, Andrew
Scott, Des
Jelsma, Jennifer
author_facet Verstraete, Janine
Lloyd, Andrew
Scott, Des
Jelsma, Jennifer
author_sort Verstraete, Janine
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The EQ-5D-Y Proxy is currently recommended for Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) measurement in children aged 4–8 years of age. However, it has only been validated in children over six years of age. The aim of this study was to investigate the performance of the EQ-5D-Y proxy version 1 in children between the ages of 3–6 years. METHODS: A sample of 328 children between 3 and 6 years of age were recruited which included children who were either acutely-ill (AI), chronically-ill (CI) or from the general school going population (GP). The EQ-5D-Y Proxy Version 1 and the PedsQL questionnaires were administered at baseline. The EQ-5D-Y Proxy was administered telephonically 24 h later to children with chronic illnesses to establish test-retest reliability. The distribution of dimensions and summary scores, Cohen’s kappa, the intraclass correlation coefficient, Pearson’s correlation and Analysis of variance were used to explore the reliability, and validity of the EQ-5D-Y for each age group. A single index score was estimated using Latent scores and Adult EQ-5D-3 L values (Dolan). RESULTS: The groups included 3-year olds (n = 105), 4-year olds (n = 98) and 5-years olds (n = 118). The dimension Looking after Myself had the greatest variability between age groups and had the highest rate of problems reported. Worried, Sad or Unhappy and Pain or Discomfort were not stable across time in test-retest analysis. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and single index scores estimated using the latent values and Dolan tariff had good test retest (except for the latent value scores in a small number of 4-year olds). EQ-5D-Y scores for all ages had small to moderate correlations with PedsQL total score. The EQ-5D-Y discriminated well between children with a health condition and the general population for all age groups. Caregivers reported difficulty completing the Looking after Myself dimension due to age-related difficulties with washing and dressing. CONCLUSION: The dimension of Looking after Myself is problematic for these young children but most notably so in the 3 year old group. If one considers the summary scores of the EQ-5D-Y Proxy version 1 it appears to work well. Known group validity was demonstrated. Concurrent validity was demonstrated on a composite level but not for individual dimensions of Usual Activities or Worried, Sad or Unhappy.. The observable dimensions demonstrated stability over time, with the inferred dimensions (Pain or Discomfort and Worried, Sad or Unhappy) less so, which is to be expected. Further work is needed in exploring either the adaptation of the dimensions in the younger age groups.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7247261
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72472612020-06-01 How does the EQ-5D-Y Proxy version 1 perform in 3, 4 and 5-year-old children? Verstraete, Janine Lloyd, Andrew Scott, Des Jelsma, Jennifer Health Qual Life Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: The EQ-5D-Y Proxy is currently recommended for Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) measurement in children aged 4–8 years of age. However, it has only been validated in children over six years of age. The aim of this study was to investigate the performance of the EQ-5D-Y proxy version 1 in children between the ages of 3–6 years. METHODS: A sample of 328 children between 3 and 6 years of age were recruited which included children who were either acutely-ill (AI), chronically-ill (CI) or from the general school going population (GP). The EQ-5D-Y Proxy Version 1 and the PedsQL questionnaires were administered at baseline. The EQ-5D-Y Proxy was administered telephonically 24 h later to children with chronic illnesses to establish test-retest reliability. The distribution of dimensions and summary scores, Cohen’s kappa, the intraclass correlation coefficient, Pearson’s correlation and Analysis of variance were used to explore the reliability, and validity of the EQ-5D-Y for each age group. A single index score was estimated using Latent scores and Adult EQ-5D-3 L values (Dolan). RESULTS: The groups included 3-year olds (n = 105), 4-year olds (n = 98) and 5-years olds (n = 118). The dimension Looking after Myself had the greatest variability between age groups and had the highest rate of problems reported. Worried, Sad or Unhappy and Pain or Discomfort were not stable across time in test-retest analysis. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and single index scores estimated using the latent values and Dolan tariff had good test retest (except for the latent value scores in a small number of 4-year olds). EQ-5D-Y scores for all ages had small to moderate correlations with PedsQL total score. The EQ-5D-Y discriminated well between children with a health condition and the general population for all age groups. Caregivers reported difficulty completing the Looking after Myself dimension due to age-related difficulties with washing and dressing. CONCLUSION: The dimension of Looking after Myself is problematic for these young children but most notably so in the 3 year old group. If one considers the summary scores of the EQ-5D-Y Proxy version 1 it appears to work well. Known group validity was demonstrated. Concurrent validity was demonstrated on a composite level but not for individual dimensions of Usual Activities or Worried, Sad or Unhappy.. The observable dimensions demonstrated stability over time, with the inferred dimensions (Pain or Discomfort and Worried, Sad or Unhappy) less so, which is to be expected. Further work is needed in exploring either the adaptation of the dimensions in the younger age groups. BioMed Central 2020-05-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7247261/ /pubmed/32448278 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01410-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Verstraete, Janine
Lloyd, Andrew
Scott, Des
Jelsma, Jennifer
How does the EQ-5D-Y Proxy version 1 perform in 3, 4 and 5-year-old children?
title How does the EQ-5D-Y Proxy version 1 perform in 3, 4 and 5-year-old children?
title_full How does the EQ-5D-Y Proxy version 1 perform in 3, 4 and 5-year-old children?
title_fullStr How does the EQ-5D-Y Proxy version 1 perform in 3, 4 and 5-year-old children?
title_full_unstemmed How does the EQ-5D-Y Proxy version 1 perform in 3, 4 and 5-year-old children?
title_short How does the EQ-5D-Y Proxy version 1 perform in 3, 4 and 5-year-old children?
title_sort how does the eq-5d-y proxy version 1 perform in 3, 4 and 5-year-old children?
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7247261/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32448278
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01410-3
work_keys_str_mv AT verstraetejanine howdoestheeq5dyproxyversion1performin34and5yearoldchildren
AT lloydandrew howdoestheeq5dyproxyversion1performin34and5yearoldchildren
AT scottdes howdoestheeq5dyproxyversion1performin34and5yearoldchildren
AT jelsmajennifer howdoestheeq5dyproxyversion1performin34and5yearoldchildren