Validity, Responsiveness, and Minimal Important Difference for the SF-6D Health Utility Scale in a Spinal Cord Injured Population

Jul 1, 2008, 00:00 AM
10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00311.x
https://www.valueinhealthjournal.com/article/S1098-3015(10)60545-1/fulltext
Section Title :
Section Order : 14
First Page :

Objective

To determine the feasibility, acceptability, discriminative validity, responsiveness, and minimal important difference (MID) of the SF-6D for people with spinal cord injury (SCI).

Methods

A total of 305 people with SCI completed the SF-36 health status questionnaire at baseline and at subsequent occurrence of a urinary tract infection (UTI) or 6-month follow-up. Normative SF-36 data were obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. SF-36 scores were transformed to SF-6D utility values using Brazier's algorithm. We used UTI as the external criterion of clinically important change to determine responsiveness and two categories of the SF-36 transition question (“somewhat worse” and “somewhat better”) as the external criterion to determine the MID. Derived SF-12 responsiveness was also assessed.

Results

The mean SF-6D values were: 0.68 (SD 0.21, n = 305) all patients; 0.66 (SD 0.19, n = 167) tetraplegia; 0.72 (SD 0.26, n = 138) paraplegia; 0.57 (SD 0.15, n = 138) with UTI. The Australian normative SF-6D mean value was 0.80 (SD 0.14, n = 18,005). The SF-6D was able to discriminate between SCI and the Australian normative sample (effect size [ES] = 0.86), tetraplegia–paraplegia (ES = 0.23), and it was responsive to UTI (ES = 0.86 SF-36 variant, ES = 0.92 SF-12 variant). The MID for respondents who reported being somewhat worse or somewhat better at follow-up was 0.03 (SD 0.17, n = 108/305), while the MID for only those who were somewhat worse was 0.10 (SD 0.14, n = 58).

Conclusions

The content of the SF-6D is more appropriate than that of the SF-36 for this physically impaired population. The SF-6D has discriminative power and is responsive to clinically important change because of UTI. The MID is consistent with published estimates for other disease groups.

https://www.valueinhealthjournal.com/action/showCitFormats?pii=S1098-3015(10)60545-1&doi=10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00311.x
HEOR Topics :
  • Health State Utilities
  • Injury & Trauma
  • Instrument Development, Validation, & Translation
  • Patient-Centered Research
  • Specific Diseases & Conditions
  • Urinary/Kidney Disorders
Tags :
  • health economics
  • health preference state
  • SF-6D
  • spinal cord injury
  • urinary tract infection
  • validity
Regions :
  • Asia Pacific (including Oceania)