OBJECTIVES: To analyze the difference of quality of life between two different scales for the general population in China, and then discuss the expanding quality of life.

METHODS: A total of 800 respondents were selected from four Chinese cities through convenient sampling, quality of life was measured using the EQ-5D-3L and ICECAP-A scales. Spearman correlation, Bland-Altman plot consistency and Factor analysis were used to explore the differences between the two scales in evaluating the QOL.

RESULTS: The average utility value and 95% confidence interval of EQ-5D-3L and ICECAP-A scales for the general population in China are 0.954 (0.948, 0.960) and 0.862 (0.854, 0.871). There is a statistically significant positive correlation between the total scores of the two scales (r=0.187, P＜0.001). Bland-Altman plot analysis shows that the 95% limits of agreement between the two scales ranged from -0.35 to 0.17, intra-group correlation coefficient (ICC=0.193). Factor analysis extracts two common factors with Eigenvalue larger than 1. The rotation shows that the five dimensions of ICECAP-A scale are mainly loaded on factor 1, while the Mobility and Self-care dimensions of EQ-5D-3L scale are also loaded on factor 1. The five dimensions of EQ-5D-3L scale are mainly loaded on factor 2, while the kindness/support dimension of ICECAP-A scale are also partly loaded on factor 2.

CONCLUSIONS: Most of the dimensions and the total scores of the two scales were correlated, but the correlation was weak and the consistency was poor. The two scales can be seen as complementary measures, rather than substitutes for one another, and the meaning of quality of life should cover a wider range of fields such as feasibility.