Health-related quality of life in primary care patients: a comparison between EQ-5D-5L utility score and EQ-visual analogue scale.

Objective: The EQ-VAS is an important component of the EQ-5D questionnaire. However, there is limited evidence comparing its performance to the EQ-5D utility score, which restricts its use in the population. This study aimed to EQ-5D-5L utility score and EQ-visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) in primary care patients in Hong Kong (HK).

Methods: Secondary data analysis was performed on the data collected from a cross-sectional survey to investigate patient engagement in HK. Participants were recruited through random sampling from a single general outpatient clinic. Trained investigators conducted face-to-face interviews with all eligible patients attending the clinic. Patients who were: 1) ≥ 18 years old, 2) have visited the clinic at least once in the last 6 months, 3) no cognitive problems, and 4) can speak and understand the local language. Pearson correlation was used to explore the association between EQ-5D utility and EQ-VAS score. Ordinary least squares regression and heteroscedastic Tobit regression models were adopted to analyze the EQ-VAS and EQ-5D utility data, respectively.

Results: The analysis included data from 1,004 responses (response rate = 65%). Around 52.7% of participants were female, 25.9% completed tertiary or above education, and 75.1% living with chronic disease. The mean EQ-5D utility and EQ-VAS score were 0.92 (SD = 0.13) and 72.27 (SD = 14.69), respectively. A significant association was found between EQ-5D utility and EQ-VAS score, with coefficients ranging from 0.335 (participants who divorced) to 0.744 (participants living alone). Around 98.5% reported having no problems with 'Self-care', followed by 'Usual activities' (96.3%), 'Mobility' (91.5%) and 'Anxiety/depression' (79.9%). The correlation between EQ-VAS score and EQ-5D utility was positive for each dimension of the EQ-5D instrument (correlation coefficients ranged between 0.211 and 0.623). Age strongly influenced the magnitude and trajectory of EQ-VAS score and utility, as observed in the changes. The regression model showed that 'Mobility', 'Pain/discomfort', and 'Anxiety/depression' have considerable influence on EQ-VAS score.

Conclusions: This study compared the EQ-5D utility score and EQ-VAS in HK primary care setting. Although heterogeneity existed, the EQ-VAS and utility score are significantly correlated and reliable for evaluating health-related quality of life in this population.