Objectives: To generate insight into the differences between utility measures EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D), Health Utilities Index Mark II (HUI2) and Mark III (HUI3) and their impact on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for hearing aid fitting Methods: Persons with hearing complaints completed EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 at baseline and, when applicable, after hearing aid fitting. Practicality, construct validity, agreement, responsiveness and impact on the ICER were examined. Results: All measures had high completion rates. HUI3 was capable of discriminating between clinically distinctive groups. Utility scores (n = 315) for EQ-5D UK and Dutch tariff (0.83; 0.86), HUI2 (0.77) and HUI3 (0.61) were significantly different, agreement was low to moderate. Change after hearing aid fitting (n = 70) for HUI2 (0.07) and HUI3 (0.12) was statistically significant, unlike the EQ-5D UK (0.01) and Dutch (0.00) tariff. ICERs varied from €647,209/QALY for the EQ-5D Dutch tariff to €15,811/QALY for HUI3. Conclusion: Utility scores, utility gain and ICERs heavily depend on the measure that is used to elicit them. This study indicates HUI3 as the instrument of first choice when measuring utility in a population with hearing complaints, but emphasizes the importance of a clear notion of what constitutes utility with regard to economic analyses.

, , , ,
doi.org/10.1007/s11136-007-9237-x, hdl.handle.net/1765/36394
Quality of Life Research
Erasmus MC: University Medical Center Rotterdam

Grutters, J.P.C, Joore, M.A, van der Horst, F.G.E.M, Verschuure, H, Dreschler, W.A, & Anteunis, L.J.C. (2007). Choosing between measures: Comparison of EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 in persons with hearing complaints. Quality of Life Research, 16(8), 1439–1449. doi:10.1007/s11136-007-9237-x