Evaluating conceptual model measurement and psychometric properties of Oral health-related quality of life instruments available for older adults: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Older adults present a variety of oral diseases and conditions, in addition to co-morbidities and limited access to dental care, which significantly impact their oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). There are many instruments published to measure OHRQoL. However, it is challenging for clinicians and researchers to choose the best instrument for a given purpose. PURPOSE: To identify OHRQoL instruments available for older adults and summarize the evidence on the conceptual and measurement model, psychometric properties, interpretability, and administration issues of OHRQoL instruments available for older adults through a systematic review. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and CENTRAL up to February 2023. Articles reporting information on the concept model measurement, psychometric properties, and administration issues of an instrument measuring OHRQoL in older adults were included. Two researchers independently evaluated each instrument using the Evaluating Measures of Patient-Reported Outcomes (EMPRO) tool. The overall score and seven attribute-specific scores were calculated (range 0-100): Conceptual and measurement model, Reliability, Validity, Responsiveness, Interpretability, Burden, and Alternative forms. RESULTS: We identified 14 instruments evaluated in 97 articles. The overall score varied between 73.7 and 8.9, with only six questionnaires over the threshold score 50.0. EORTC QLQ OH-15 (cancer-specific questionnaire) achieved the highest score (73.7), followed by OHIP (generic OHRQoL questionnaire) (66.9), GOHAI (generic OHRQoL questionnaire) (65.5), and OHIDL (generic OHRQoL questionnaire) (65.2). Overall, the Conceptual and measurement model and Validity showed the best performance, while Responsiveness and Interpretability showed the worst. Insufficient information was presented for an overall evaluation of DSQ and OHAI. CONCLUSION: The evidence supports using EORTC QLQ-OH15 as a specific instrument to assess OHRQoL in cancer patients and the OHIP-49, GOHAI, or OHIDL as generic instruments to assess OHRQoL either for cross-sectional or longitudinal studies in older adults.

Psychometric validation of the Spanish version of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26.

PURPOSE: To assess the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the Spanish version of the Expanded Prostate cancer Index Composite (EPIC) with 26 items. METHODS: Multicentric longitudinal study of patients diagnosed with localized or locally advanced prostate cancer (any T, any N, M0) treated with active surveillance, surgery, external radiotherapy, or brachytherapy. The EPIC-50 was administered initially to the cohort (n = 324 patients), until it was replaced in November 2019 by the EPIC-26 (n = 543), in both groups before treatment and 12 months after. We assessed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), reliability with Cronbach's alpha coefficient, criterion validity with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and responsiveness by testing a priori hypotheses on deterioration effect size (ES). RESULTS: The CFA confirmed the five-domain structure of the EPIC-26 proposed by the original instrument (comparative fit index = 0.95). The agreement between EPIC-50 (gold standard) and EPIC-26 domains was excellent (ICC > 0.90). Cronbach's alpha was > 0.7 in almost all domains, and the floor effect was near zero, although ceiling effect was higher than 50% in urinary incontinence and bowel domains. Hypothesized changes between before and 12 months after treatment were confirmed: ES > 0.8 in both urinary incontinence and sexual domains among patients who underwent surgery; and ES ranging 0.44-0.48 for bowel and sexual domains in patients treated with external radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: The Spanish version of the EPIC-26 has demonstrated adequate metric properties, similar to those of the original version, with acceptable goodness-of-fit indices, good criterion validity, reliability, and responsiveness to detect changes after radical prostatectomy or external radiotherapy.

Patient-centered care in Coronary Heart Disease: what do you want to measure? A systematic review of reviews on patient-reported outcome measures.

BACKGROUND: The number of published articles on Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures (PROMs) in Coronary Heart Disease (CHD), a leading cause of disability-adjusted life years lost worldwide, has been growing in the last decades. The aim of this study was to identify all the disease-specific PROMs developed for or used in CHD and summarize their characteristics (regardless of the construct), to facilitate the selection of the most adequate one for each purpose. METHODS: A systematic review of reviews was conducted in MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. PROQOLID and BiblioPRO libraries were also checked. PROMs were classified by construct and information was extracted from different sources regarding their main characteristics such as aim, number of items, specific dimensions, original language, and metric properties that have been assessed. RESULTS: After title and abstract screening of 1224 articles, 114 publications were included for full text review. Finally, we identified 56 PROMs: 12 symptoms scales, 3 measuring functional status, 21 measuring Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQL), and 20 focused on other constructs. Three of the symptoms scales were specifically designed for a study (no metric properties evaluated), and only five have been included in a published study in the last decade. Regarding functional status, reliability and validity have been assessed for Duke Activity Index and Seattle Angina Questionnaire, which present multiple language versions. For HRQL, most of the PROMs included physical, emotional, and social domains. Responsiveness has only been evaluated for 10 out the 21 HRQL PROMs identified. Other constructs included psychological aspects, self-efficacy, attitudes, perceptions, threats and expectations about the treatment, knowledge, adjustment, or limitation for work, social support, or self-care. CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide variety of instruments to assess the patients' perspective in CHD, covering several constructs. This is the first systematic review of specific PROMs for CHD including all constructs. It has practical significance, as it summarizes relevant information that may help clinicians, researchers, and other healthcare stakeholders to choose the most adequate instrument for promoting shared decision making in a trend towards value-based healthcare.

Reference values of EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-BR23, and EQ-5D-5L for women with non-metastatic breast cancer at diagnosis and 2 years after.

PURPOSE: To obtain reference norms of EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-BR23, and EQ-5D-5L, based on a population of Spanish non-metastatic breast cancer patients at diagnosis and 2 years after, according to relevant demographic and clinical characteristics. METHODS: Multicentric prospective cohort study including consecutive women aged ≥ 18 years with a diagnosis of incident non-metastatic breast cancer from April 2013 to May 2015. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaires were administered between diagnosis and beginning the therapy, and 2 years after. HRQoL differences according to age, comorbidity and stage were tested with ANOVA or Chi Square test and multivariate linear regression models. RESULTS: 1276 patients were included, with a mean age of 58 years. Multivariate models of EORTC QLQ-C30 summary score and EQ-5D-5L index at diagnosis and at 2-year follow-up show the independent association of comorbidity and tumor stage with HRQoL. The standardized multivariate regression coefficient of EORTC QLQ-C30 summary score was lower (poorer HRQoL) for women with stage II and III than for those with stage 0 at diagnosis (- 0.11 and - 0.07, p < 0.05) and follow-up (- 0.15 and - 0.10, p < 0.01). The EQ-5D-5L index indicated poorer HRQoL for women with Charlson comorbidity index ≥ 2 than comorbidity 0 both at diagnosis (- 0.13, p < 0.001) and follow-up (- 0.18, p < 0.001). Therefore, we provided the reference norms at diagnosis and at the 2-year follow-up, stratified by age, comorbidity index, and tumor stage. CONCLUSION: These HRQoL reference norms can be useful to interpret the scores of women with non-metastatic breast cancer, comparing them with country-specific reference values for this population.

Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-Y administered through a smartphone app in children with asthma: a longitudinal questionnaire study.

BACKGROUND: Asthma impacts children's physical, emotional, and psychosocial Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQL). The EQ-5D-Y is a generic econometric instrument developed to measure HRQL in children. OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of feasibility, validity, reliability, and responsiveness of EQ-5D-Y descriptive system and utility index to allow the assessment of HRQL in children with asthma, aged 8-11 years (self-response version) or under 8 years old (proxy-response version). METHODS: We used data from baseline to 10 months of follow-up of an observational, prospective study of children with persistent asthma recruited by pediatricians in Spain (2018-2020). HRQL instruments were administered through a smartphone application: ARCA app. The EQ-5D-Y is composed of a 5-dimension descriptive system, a utility index ranging from 1 to - 0.5392, and a general health visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS). The Pediatric Asthma Impact Scale (PROMIS-PAIS) includes 8 items, providing a raw score. Construct validity hypotheses were stated a priori, and evaluated following two approaches, multitrait-multimethod matrix and known groups' comparisons. Reliability and responsiveness subsamples were defined by stability or change in EQ-VAS and the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), to estimate the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the magnitude of change over time. RESULTS: The EQ-5D-Y was completed at baseline for 119 children (81 self-responded and 38 through proxy response), with a mean age of 9.1 (1.7) years. Mean (SD) of the EQ-5D-Y utility index was 0.93 (0.11), with ceiling and floor effects of 60.3% and 0%, respectively. Multitrait-multimethod matrix confirmed the associations previously hypothesized for the EQ-5D-Y utility index [moderate with PROMIS-PAIS (0.38) and weak with ACQ (0.28)], and for the EQ-5D-Y dimension "problems doing usual activities" [moderate with the ACQ item (0.35) and weak with the PROMIS-PAIS item (0.17)]. Statistically significant differences were found in the EQ-5D-Y between groups defined by asthma control, reliever inhalers use, and second-hand smoke exposure, with mostly moderate effect sizes (0.45-0.75). The ICC of the EQ-5D-Y utility index in the stable subsamples was high (0.81 and 0.79); and responsiveness subsamples presented a moderate to large magnitude of change (0.68 and 0.78), though without statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the use of the EQ-5D-Y as a feasible, valid, and reliable instrument for evaluating HRQL in children with persistent asthma. Further studies are needed on the responsiveness of the EQ-5D-Y in this population.

Mapping the Patient-Oriented Prostate Utility Scale From the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite and the Short-Form Health Surveys.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to develop mapping algorithms from the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) and the Short-Form (SF) Health Surveys to the Patient-Oriented Prostate Utility Scale (PORPUS), an econometric instrument specifically developed for patients with prostate cancer. METHODS: Data were drawn from 2 cohorts concurrently administering PORPUS, EPIC-50, and SF-36v2. The development cohort included patients who had received a diagnosis of localized or locally advanced prostate cancer from 2017 to 2019. The validation cohort included men who had received a diagnosis of localized prostate cancer from 2014 to 2016. Linear regression models were constructed with ln(1 - PORPUS utility) as the dependent variable and scores from the original and brief versions of the EPIC and SF as independent variables. The predictive capacity of mapping models constructed with all possible combinations of these 2 instruments was assessed through the proportion of variance explained (R2) and the agreement between predicted and observed values. Validation was based on the comparison between estimated and observed utility values in the validation cohort. RESULTS: Models constructed with EPIC-50 with and without SF yielded the highest predictive capacity (R2 = 0.884, 0.871, and 0.842) in comparison with models constructed with EPIC-26 (R2 = 0.844, 0.827, and 0.776). The intraclass correlation coefficient was excellent in the 4 models (>0.9) with EPIC and SF. In the validation cohort, predicted PORPUS utilities were slightly higher than those observed, but differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Mapping algorithms from both the original and the abbreviated versions of the EPIC and the SF Health Surveys allow estimating PORPUS utilities for economic evaluations with cost-utility analyses in patients with prostate cancer.

Effects of short- and long-acting beta-agonists on asthma exacerbations: a prospective cohort.

BACKGROUND: In asthma, short- and long-acting ß-agonists (SABAs and LABAs) should be used together with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), and regular use is inappropriate. OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between patterns of use of therapy and asthma exacerbations (AEx). METHODS: Patients with asthma (6-40 years) were enrolled in France and the United Kingdom. Prescribing data, computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATIs), and text messages assessed medication use and AEx over a maximum period of 24 months. Generalized linear mixed models provided AEx risks associated with therapy. RESULTS: Among the 908 patients (median age: 20.0 years, 46.6% women, 24.5% children) answering a total of 4248 CATIs over 486 (±235) days, regular (ie, daily) use was more frequent for single LABAs and fixed dose combinations (FDCs) than for single ICS (75.6%, 70.1%, and 65.4% of investigated periods of use, respectively). Regular (ie, daily or almost daily) SABA use was observed for 21.1% of periods of use. Altogether, 265 patients (29.2%) experienced 1 or more AEx. The ORs for AEx risk related to regular vs no use of FDCs, single ICS, and single LABAs were 0.98 (95% CI = [0.73-1.33]), 0.90 (95% CI = [0.61-1.33]), and 1.29 (95% CI = [0.76-2.17]), respectively, after adjustment for cotherapy, sociodemographic, and disease characteristics. The OR was 2.09 (95% CI = [1.36-3.21]) in regular SABA users. CONCLUSION: Inhaled corticosteroids and FDCs were often used intermittently, whereas SABAs and LABAs could be used regularly, and exacerbations were frequent. Compared with non-users, the risk of exacerbation increased moderately under regular use of single LABAs, whereas it doubled, significantly, in regular SABA users, likely in relationship with poor overall asthma control.

Nursing knowledge of the principles of self-care of heart failure in primary care: a multicentre study.

INTRODUCTION: Nurses play an important part in the education of patients with HF. To prepare patients with HF for self-care maintenance behaviours, nurses must have knowledge of basic self-care maintenance principles. AIM STUDY: The aim of this study was to determine the degree of knowledge of primary care (PC) nurses on the principles of self-management of HF and variables associated with this. METHODOLOGY: This is an observational, cross-sectional descriptive study, carried out in 2014, in the city of Barcelona (Catalonia). Nurses' Knowledge of Heart Failure Education Principles questionnaire (NKHFEP) was used to assess the principles of HF self-care education. Instrument items assess knowledge of nurses on 5 themes: diet, liquids/weight, worsening signs or symptoms, medication and exercise. Factors related to adequate knowledge were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 216 PC nurses, who completed the questionnaire, the average score was 15.6 (SD: 2.2). Only 36 (16.7%) obtained an adequate level of knowledge and defined as a score ≥ 18 points. In multivariate logistic regression, nurse factors associated with an adequate knowledge of principles of self-care of HF were having achieved a PhD degree (OR: 36.4, 95% CI: 2.8-468.2, p = 0.006) and previous specific training in HF (OR: 19.8, 95% CI: 1.4-279.3, p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: The degree of knowledge of PC nurses in the principles of self-care in HF was higher among nurses who had completed the doctorate and in nurses who had received specific training in HF.

EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) Validity in Assessing the Quality of Life in Adults With Asthma: Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: The EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D), developed in 1990, is a most widely used generic tool to measure the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and considered suitable for patients with asthma. In 2009, the EuroQol Group developed a new EQ-5D version to overcome limitations related to its consistently reported high ceiling effect. To enhance the sensitivity for assessing the HRQoL in further patient populations, the number of responses of EQ-5D was increased from 3 to 5 levels (EQ-5D-5L). Moreover, the availability of well-defined requirements for its Web-based administration allows EQ-5D-5L use to monitor the HRQoL in electronic health (eHealth) programs. No study has evaluated the metric properties of the new EQ-5D-5L in patients with asthma yet. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine the distribution, construct validity, and reliability of the new EQ-5D-5L questionnaire administered online to adults with asthma. METHODS: We evaluated patients with asthma (age: 18-40 years) from a primary care setting in France and England, who self-completed the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire online. The inclusion criteria were persistent asthma defined as >6 months of prescribed inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists or inhaled corticosteroids alone during the 12 months prior to inclusion. The EQ-5D index was obtained by applying the English preference value set for the new EQ-5D-5L and the French 3L-5L crosswalk value set. Both value sets produced single preference-based indices ranging from 1 (best health state) to negative values (health states valued as worse than death), where 0=death, allowing the calculation of quality-adjusted life years. Responses to dimensions and index distribution, including ceiling and floor effects, were examined. The construct validity was assessed by comparing the means of known groups by analyses of variance and calculation of effect sizes. RESULTS: Of 312 patients answering the baseline Web-based survey, 290 completed the EQ-5D-5L (93%). The floor effect was null, and the ceiling effect was 26.5% (74/279). The mean EQ-5D-5L index was 0.88 (SD 0.14) with the English value set and 0.83 (SD 0.19) with the French 3L-5L crosswalk value set. In both indices, large effect sizes were observed for known groups defined by the Asthma Control Questionnaire (1.06 and 1.04, P<.001). Differences between extreme groups defined by chronic conditions (P=.002 and P=.003 for the English value set and French 3L-5L crosswalk value set, respectively), short-acting beta-agonists (SABAs) canisters in the last 12 months (P=.02 and P=.03), or SABA use during the previous 4 weeks (P=.03 and P=.01) were of moderate magnitude with effect sizes around 0.5. CONCLUSIONS: The new EQ-5D-5L questionnaire has an acceptable ceiling effect, a good construct validity based on the discriminant ability for distinguishing among health-related known groups, and high reliability, supporting its adequacy for assessing the HRQoL in patients with asthma. EQ-5D-5L completion by most Web-based respondents supports the feasibility of this administration form.

Measurement Properties of the Online EuroQol-5D-Youth Instrument in Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Questionnaire Study.

BACKGROUND: The lack of continuity between health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments designed for children and adults hinders change analysis with a life course approach. To resolve this gap, EuroQol (EQ) developed the EQ-5D-Youth (EQ-5D-Y), derived from the EQ-5D for adults. Few studies have assessed the metric properties of EQ-5D-Y in children with specific chronic conditions, and none have done so for children with type I diabetes mellitus (T1DM). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the acceptability, validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the EQ-5D-Y in children and adolescents with T1DM, when administered online. METHODS: Participants with T1DM were consecutively recruited from July to December 2014, from a list of potential candidates aged 8-19 years, who attended outpatient pediatric endocrinology units. Before every quarterly routine visit, participants received an email/telephone reminder to complete the online version of two generic HRQoL questionnaires: EQ-5D-Y and KIDSCREEN-27. The EQ-5D-Y measures five dimensions, from which an equally weighted summary score was constructed (range: 0-100). Completion rate and distribution statistics were calculated. Construct validity was evaluated through known group comparisons based on general health, acute diabetic decompensations, mental health, family function, and a multitrait, multimethod matrix between EQ-5D-Y and KIDSCREEN by using Spearman correlations. Construct validity hypotheses were stated a priori. Reliability was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient and responsiveness by testing changes over time and calculating the effect size. Reliability and responsiveness were tested among the stable and improved subsamples defined by a KIDSCREEN-10 index change of <4.5 points or ≥4.5 points, respectively, from the first to the fourth visit. RESULTS: Of the 136 participants, 119 (87.5%) responded to the EQ-5D-Y at the last visit. The dimensions that showed higher percentages of participants with problems were "having pain/discomfort" (34.6%) and "worried/sad/unhappy" (28.7%). The mean (SD) of the EQ-5D-Y summary score was 8.5 (10.9), with ceiling and floor effects of 50.7% and 0%, respectively. Statistically significant HRQoL differences between groups defined by their general health (excellent/very good and good/regular/bad) and mental health (Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire score ≤15 and >16, respectively) were found in three EQ-5D-Y dimensions ("doing usual activities," "having pain/discomfort," and "feeling worried/sad/unhappy"), summary score (effect size for general health and mental health groups=0.7 and 1.5, respectively), and KIDSCREEN-10 index (effect size for general health and mental health groups=0.6 and 0.9, respectively). Significant differences in the EQ-5D-Y dimensions were also found according to acute diabetic decompensations in "looking after myself" (P=.005) and according to family function in "having pain/discomfort" (P=.03). Results of the multitrait, multimethod matrix confirmed three of the four relationships hypothesized as substantial (0.21, 0.58, 0.50, and 0.46). The EQ-5D-Y summary score presented an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.83. Statistically significant change between visits was observed in the improved subsample, with an effect size of 0.7 (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: These results support the use of the EQ-5D-Y administered online as an acceptable, valid, reliable, and responsive instrument for evaluating HRQoL in children and adolescents with T1DM.

Assessing oral health-related quality of life in children and adolescents: a systematic review and standardized comparison of available instruments.

OBJECTIVES: To obtain a systematic and standardized evaluation of the current evidence on development process, metric properties, and administration issues of oral health-related quality of life instruments available for children and adolescents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search until October 2016 was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Lilacs, SciELO, and Cochrane databases. Articles with information regarding the development process, metric properties, and administration issues of pediatric instruments measuring oral health-related quality of life were eligible for inclusion. Two researchers independently evaluated each instrument applying the Evaluating Measures of Patient-Reported Outcomes (EMPRO) tool. An overall and seven attribute-specific EMPRO scores were calculated (range 0-100, worst to best): measurement model, reliability, validity, responsiveness, interpretability, burden, and alternative forms. RESULTS: We identified 18 instruments evaluated in 132 articles. From five instruments designed for preschoolers, the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale (ECOHIS) obtained the highest overall EMPRO score (82.2). Of nine identified for schoolchildren and adolescents, the best rated instrument was the Child Perceptions Questionnaire 11-14 (82.1). Among the four instruments developed for any age, the Family Impact Scale (FIS) obtained the highest scores (80.3). CONCLUSION: The evidence supports the use of the ECOHIS for preschoolers, while the age is a key factor when choosing among the four recommended instruments for schoolchildren and adolescents. Instruments for specific conditions, symptoms, or treatments need further research on metric properties. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our results facilitate decision-making on the correct oral health-related quality of life instrument selection for any certain study purpose and population during the childhood and adolescence life cycle.

Head-to-head comparison between the EQ-5D-5L and the EQ-5D-3L in general population health surveys.

BACKGROUND: The EQ-5D has been frequently used in national health surveys. This study is a head-to-head comparison to assess how expanding the number of levels from three (EQ-5D-3L) to five in the new EQ-5D-5L version has improved its distribution, discriminatory power, and validity in the general population. METHODS: A representative sample (N = 7554) from the Catalan Health Interview Survey 2011-2012, aged ≥18, answered both EQ-5D versions, and we evaluated the response redistribution and inconsistencies between them. To assess validity of this redistribution, we calculated the mean of the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), which measures perceived health. The discriminatory power was examined with Shannon Indices, calculated for each dimension separately. Spanish preference value sets were applied to obtain utility indices, examining their distribution with statistics of central tendency and dispersion. We estimated the proportion of individuals reporting the best health state in EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L within groups of specific chronic conditions and their VAS mean. RESULTS: A very small reduction in the percentage of individuals with the best health state was observed, from 61.8% in EQ-5D-3L to 60.8% in EQ-5D-5L. In contrast, a large proportion of individuals reporting extreme problems in the 3 L version moved to severe problems (level 4) in the 5 L version, particularly for pain/discomfort (75.5%) and anxiety/depression (66.4%). The average proportion of inconsistencies was 0.9%. The pattern of the perceived health VAS mean confirmed the hypothesis established a priori, supporting the validity of the observed redistribution. Shannon index showed that absolute informativity was higher in the 5 L version for all dimensions. The means (SD) of the Spanish EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L indices were 0.87 (0.25) and 0.89 (0.22). The proportion of individuals with the best health state within each specific chronic condition was very similar, regardless of the EQ-5D version (≤ 30% in half of the 28 chronic conditions). CONCLUSION: Although the proportion of individuals with the best possible health state is still very high, our findings support that the increase of levels provided by the EQ-5D-5L contributed to the validity and discriminatory power of this new version to measure health in general population, as in the national health surveys.

Validity of the EQ-5D-5L and reference norms for the Spanish population.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The EuroQol 5 dimensions 5 levels (EQ-5D-5L) is the new version of EQ-5D, developed to improve its discriminatory capacity. This study aims to evaluate the construct validity of the Spanish version and provide index and dimension population-based reference norms for the new EQ-5D-5L. METHODS: Data were obtained from the 2011/2012 Spanish National Health Survey, with a representative sample (n = 20,587) of non-institutionalized Spanish adults (≥ 18 years). The EQ-5D-5L index was calculated by using the Spanish value set. Construct validity was evaluated by comparing known groups with estimators obtained through regression models, adjusted by age and gender. Sampling weights were applied to restore the representativeness of the sample and to calculate the norms stratified by gender and age groups. We calculated the percentages and standard errors of dimensions, and the deciles, percentiles 5 and 95, means, and 95% confidence intervals of the health index. RESULTS: All the hypotheses established a priori for known groups were confirmed (P < 0.001). The EQ-5D-5L index indicated worse health in groups with lower education level (from 0.94 to 0.87), higher number of chronic conditions (0.96-0.79), probable psychiatric disorder (0.94 vs 0.80), strong limitations (0.96-0.46), higher number of days of restriction (0.93-0.64) or confinement to bed (0.92-0.49), and hospitalized in the previous 12 months (0.92 vs 0.81). CONCLUSIONS: The EQ-5D-5L is a valid instrument to measure perceived health in the Spanish-speaking population. The representative population-based norms provided here will help improve the interpretation of results obtained with the new EQ-5D-5L.

Constant-Murley Score: systematic review and standardized evaluation in different shoulder pathologies.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Constant-Murley Score (CMS) in various shoulder pathologies, based on a systematic review and expert standardized evaluations. METHODS: A systematic review was performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Titles and abstracts were reviewed and finally the included articles were grouped according to patients' pathologies. Two expert evaluators independently assessed the CMS properties of reliability, validity, responsiveness to change, interpretability and burden score in each group, using the EMPRO (Evaluating Measures of Patient Reported Outcomes) tool. The CMS properties were assessed per attribute and overall for each considered group. Only the concept and measurement model was assessed globally. RESULTS: Five individual pathologies (i.e. subacromial, fractures, arthritis, instability and frozen shoulder) and two additional groups (i.e. various pathologies and healthy subjects) were considered. Overall EMPRO scores ranged from 58.6 for subacromial to 30.6 points for instability. Responsiveness to change was the only quality to obtain at least 50 points across all groups, but for frozen shoulder. Insufficient information was obtained in relation to the concept and measurement model and great variability was seen in the other evaluated attributes. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence does not support the CMS as a gold standard in shoulder evaluation. Its use is advisable for subacromial pathology; but data are inconclusive for other shoulder conditions. Prospective studies exploring the psychometric properties of the scale, particularly for fractures, arthritis, instability and frozen shoulder are needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review.

Economic evaluation of treatments for patients with localized prostate cancer in Europe: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to assess the efficiency of treatments in patients with localized prostate cancer, by synthesizing available evidence from European economic evaluations through systematic review. METHODS: Articles published 2000-2015 were searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE and NHS EED (Prospero protocol CRD42015022063). Two authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted the data. A third reviewer resolved discrepancies. We included European economic evaluations or cost comparison studies, of any modality of surgery or radiotherapy treatments, regardless the comparator/s. Drummond's Checklist was used for quality assessment. RESULTS: After reviewing 8,789 titles, 13 European eligible studies were included: eight cost-utility, two cost-effectiveness, one cost-minimization, and two cost-comparison analyses. Of them, five compared interventions with expectant management, four contrasted robotic with non robotic-assisted surgery, three assessed new modalities of radiotherapy, and three compared radical prostatectomy with brachytherapy. All but two studies scored ≥8 in the quality checklist. Considering scenario and comparator, three interventions were qualified as dominant strategies (active surveillance, robotic-assisted surgery and IMRT), and six were cost-effective (radical prostatectomy, robotic-assisted surgery, IMRT, proton therapy, brachytherapy, and 3DCRT). However, QALY gains in most of them were small. For interventions considered as dominant strategies, QALY gain was 0.013 for active surveillance over radical prostatectomy; and 0.007 for robotic-assisted over non-robotic techniques. The highest QALY gains were 0.57-0.86 for radical prostatectomy vs watchful waiting, and 0.72 for brachytherapy vs conventional radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, relevant treatment alternatives for localized prostate cancer are scarcely evaluated in Europe. Very limited available evidence supports the cost-effectiveness of radical prostatectomy over watchful waiting, brachytherapy over radical prostatectomy, and new treatment modalities over traditional procedures. Relevant disparities were detected among studies, mainly based on effectiveness. These apparently contradictory results may be reflecting the difficulty of interpreting small differences between treatments regarding QALY gains.

Validation of the Spanish-language version of the Prolapse Quality of Life questionnaire in Chilean women.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The Prolapse Quality of Life (P-QOL) questionnaire is a specific health-related quality of life (HRQL) instrument to assess the impact of POP on women. It has been validated in English-speaking women and to date has been translated into several other languages. However, currently there is no Spanish translation of the P-QOL questionnaire. The aim of this study was to translate the P-QOL questionnaire into Spanish and to assess its feasibility, validity, and reliability. METHODS: Following a forward- and back-translation of the original English P-QOL questionnaire into Spanish language, the translated questionnaire was reviewed by a group of patients as well as an expert panel to assess its comprehensibility. In this cross-sectional study women with POP symptoms were recruited from a tertiary referral teaching hospital. Women were defined as symptomatic if they report feeling a lump/bulge/pressure in the vagina. The Spanish translated P-QOL questionnaire was self-administered to all women. Reliability, content, and construct validity were evaluated using the Cronbach's alpha coefficient, ANOVA, and Spearman's correlation tests. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-eight women were studied. There were no missing items. The Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.626 to 0.866 across domains, demonstrating the good reliability of the Spanish P-QOL. The severity of symptoms was related to the worst quality of life, but the severity of POP was not related to poorer QoL. CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish translated version of the P-QOL is a reliable, consistent and valid instrument to assess symptom severity and QoL impact in Chilean women with POP.

Assessing health-related quality of life in patients with heart failure: a systematic, standardized comparison of available measures.

To systematically evaluate available health-related quality of life (HRQL) instruments for use in patients with heart failure (HF). Seven HF-specific HRQL questionnaires and associated studies of their metric properties were identified by systematic review: the Chronic Heart Failure Assessment Tool, the Cardiac Health Profile congestive heart failure, the Chronic Heart Failure Questionnaire (CHFQ), the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ), the Left Ventricular Disease Questionnaire (LVDQ), the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ), and the Quality of Life in Severe Heart Failure Questionnaire. Each instrument was assessed by four experts using a standardized tool for evaluating patient-reported outcomes (EMPRO; scores from 0 to 100). Four questionnaires were given adequate scores (median >50) for the attribute "conceptual model." The LVDQ had the highest rated median for "reliability" (72.8). The CHFQ, the KCCQ, and the MLHFQ all got reasonable scores for "validity" (from 54.4 to 76.4). The reviewers rated the KCCQ the highest in terms of "sensitivity to change" (median 94.4). Only the CHFQ (50.0) and the KCCQ (72.2) received adequate scores for the "interpretability" attribute. The most highly rated instruments based on the overall EMPRO score were the KCCQ (64.4) and the MLHFQ (60.7), followed by the CHFQ (59.2). Based on the first systematic and reliable expert-based evaluation of available HF-specific HRQL questionnaires, the evidence seems to support the choice of the KCCQ, the MLHFQ, and the CHFQ over the others, which require further research on metric properties.

Long-acting beta-agonists plus inhaled corticosteroids safety: a systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomized studies.

BACKGROUND: Although several systematic reviews investigated the safety of long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) in asthma, they mainly addressed randomized clinical trials while evidence from non-randomized studies has been mostly neglected. We aim to assess the risk of serious adverse events in adults and children with asthma treated with LABAs and Inhaled Corticosteroids (ICs), compared to patients treated only with ICs, from published non-randomized studies. METHODS: The protocol registration number was CRD42012003387 (http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/Prospero). Literature search for articles published since 1990 was performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Two authors selected studies independently for inclusion and extracted the data. A third reviewer resolved discrepancies. To assess the risk of serious adverse events, meta-analyses were performed calculating odds ratio summary estimators using random effect models when heterogeneity was found, and fixed effect models otherwise. RESULTS: Of 4,415 candidate articles, 1,759 abstracts were reviewed and 220 articles were fully read. Finally, 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most of them were retrospective observational cohorts. Sample sizes varied from 50 to 514,216. The meta-analyses performed (69,939-624,303 participants according to the outcome considered) showed that odds ratio of the LABAs and ICs combined treatment when compared with ICs alone was: 0.88 (95% CI 0.69-1.12) for asthma-related hospitalization; 0.75 (95% CI 0.66-0.84) for asthma-related emergency visits; 1.02 (95% CI 0.94-1.10) for systemic corticosteroids; and 0.95 (95% CI 0.9-1.0) for the combined outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from observational studies shows that the combined treatment of LABAs and ICs is not associated with a higher risk of serious adverse events, compared to ICs alone. Major gaps identified were prospective design, paediatric population and inclusion of mortality as a primary outcome.

Assessing quality of life in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic and standardized comparison of available instruments.

PURPOSE: The objective was to obtain a standardized evaluation of available prostate cancer-specific quality of life instruments used in patients with early-stage disease. METHODS: We carried out systematic literature reviews in the PubMed database to identify manuscripts which contained information regarding either the development process or metric properties of prostate cancer-specific quality of life instruments. Each instrument was evaluated by two experts, independently, using the Evaluating Measures of Patient-Reported Outcomes (EMPRO) tool. An overall and seven attribute-specific EMPRO scores were calculated (range 0-100, worst to best): measurement model, reliability, validity, responsiveness, interpretability, burden and alternative forms. RESULTS: Eight instruments and 57 manuscripts (2-15 per instrument) were identified. The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) was the best rated (overall EMPRO score 83.1 points). Good results were also obtained by University of California Los Angeles-Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI), Patient-Oriented Prostate Utility Scale (PORPUS) and Prostate Cancer Quality of Life Instrument (PC-QoL) with 77.3, 70.5 and 64.8 points, respectively. These four instruments passed with distinction the validity and responsiveness evaluation. Insufficient reliability results were observed for UCLA-PCI and PORPUS. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence supports the choice of EPIC, PORPUS or PC-QoL. Attribute-specific EMPRO results facilitate selecting the adequate instrument for every purpose. For longitudinal studies or clinical trials, where responsiveness is the priority, EPIC or PC-QoL should be considered. We recommend the PORPUS for economic evaluations because it allows cost-utility analysis, and EPIC short versions to minimize administration burden.