OBJECTIVES: In the CEE region, only Slovenia and Poland have country-specific value sets for the EQ-5D-3L hence the UK set is the most often used in health economic analyses. Our aim was to investigate the difference between the available value sets for the evaluation of chronic diseases in Hungary. METHODS: Eighteen cross-sectional studies covering 18 diagnoses conducted previously by our Department were selected. Patients’ EQ-5D-3L index scores were calculated using the time trade-off based UK and Polish, and the VAS-based European and Slovenian value sets. RESULTS: Altogether 2421 patients (55% female) were included with average age of 58.33 years (SD=16.41). The average EQ-5D-3L scores (UK, Poland, EU, Slovenia) were 0.645 (SD=0.334), 0.771 (SD=0.258), 0.661 (SD=0.259) and 0.651 (SD=0.233), respectively. The UK-Poland value difference was significant for all disease groups (p<0.05), while the EU-Slovenian difference was only significant in schizophrenia (p=0.033), diabetes (p=0.042), bladder cancer (p=0.015), benign prostatic hyperplasia (p=0.034) and ADHD (p=0.007). All the four EQ-5D-3L index scores showed a weak, negative correlation with age (r=-0.137, r=-0.131, r=-0.128, r=-0.128; p<0.001), a negative, moderate, but significant correlation with received informal care time (r=-0.458, r=-0.453, r=-0.450, r=-0.457; p<0.001). When comparing the utilities of the 18 diagnoses to the general population of the CEE region, we found that the Polish value-set was significantly different from the other three. After correcting for age and gender, we found diagnosis-specific differences between the value-sets. The value-set age interactions were also significant. CONCLUSIONS: The choice of value set may influence significantly the health state utility results in chronic diseases. The Polish value set results significantly higher values, than the UK values, especially in more severe health states. These findings deserve serious consideration in health economic analyses in the CEE region.