Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation
-
Review Comparative Study
Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D.
The SF-6D and EQ-5D are both preference-based measures of health. Empirical work is required to determine what the smallest change is in utility scores that can be regarded as important and whether this change in utility value is constant across measures and conditions. ⋯ There is evidence that the MID for these two utility measures are not equal and differ in absolute values. The EQ-5D scale has approximately twice the range of the SF-6D scale. Therefore, the estimates of the MID for each scale appear to be proportionally equivalent in the context of the range of utility scores for each scale. Further empirical work is required to see whether or not this holds true for other utility measures, patient groups and populations.
-
This paper compares a traditional biomedical model with an outcomes model for evaluating health care. The traditional model emphasizes diagnosis and disease-specific outcomes. In contrast, the outcomes model emphasizes life expectancy and health-related quality of life. ⋯ In some circumstances, successful diagnosis and treatment may actually reduce life expectancy or overall life quality. Example applications of the outcomes model from clinical policy analysis, individual decision making and shared decision-making are offered. The outcomes model has received little attention in dental health care but may have parallels to applications in other areas of medicine.