A longitudinal assessment of the responsiveness of the ICECAP-A in a randomised controlled trial of a knee pain intervention

Braving the waves: exploring capability well-being patterns in seven European countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic considerably impacted the lives of European citizens. This study aims to provide a nuanced picture of well-being patterns during the pandemic across Europe with a special focus on relevant socio-economic sub-groups. This observational study uses data from a repeated, cross-sectional, representative population survey with nine waves of data from seven European countries from April 2020 to January 2022. The analysis sample contains a total of 25,062 individuals providing 64,303 observations. Well-being is measured using the ICECAP-A, a multi-dimensional instrument for approximating capability well-being. Average levels of ICECAP-A index values and sub-dimension scores were calculated across waves, countries, and relevant sub-groups. In a fixed effects regression framework, associations of capability well-being with COVID-19 incidence, mortality, and the stringency of the imposed lockdown measures were estimated. Denmark, the Netherlands, and France experienced a U-shaped pattern in well-being (lowest point in winter 2020/21), while well-being in the UK, Germany, Portugal, and Italy followed an M-shape, with increases after April 2020, a drop in winter 2020, a recovery in the summer of 2021, and a decline in winter 2021. However, observed average well-being reductions were generally small. The largest declines were found in the well-being dimensions attachment and enjoyment and among individuals with a younger age, a financially unstable situation, and lower health. COVID-19 mortality was consistently negatively associated with capability well-being and its sub-dimensions, while stringency and incidence rate were generally not significantly associated with well-being. Further investigation is needed to understand underlying mechanisms of presented patterns.

Phase II, double blind, placebo controlled, multi-site study to evaluate the safety, feasibility and desirability of conducting a phase III study of anamorelin for anorexia in people with small cell lung cancer: A study protocol (LUANA trial)

Anorexia is experienced by most people with lung cancer during the course of their disease and treatment. Anorexia reduces response to chemotherapy and the ability of patients to cope with, and complete their treatment leading to greater morbidity, poorer prognosis and outcomes. Despite the significant importance of cancer-related anorexia, current therapies are limited, have marginal benefits and unwarranted side effects. In this multi-site, randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, phase II trial, participants will be randomly assigned (1:1) to receive once-daily oral dosing of 100mg of anamorelin HCl or matched placebo for 12 weeks. Participants can then opt into an extension phase to receive blinded intervention for another 12 weeks (weeks 13-24) at the same dose and frequency. Adults (≥18 years) with small cell lung cancer (SCLC); newly diagnosed with planned systemic therapy OR with first recurrence of disease following a documented disease-free interval ≥6 months, AND with anorexia (i.e., ≤ 37 points on the 12-item Functional Assessment of Anorexia Cachexia Treatment (FAACT A/CS) scale) will be invited to participate. Primary outcomes are safety, desirability and feasibility outcomes related to participant recruitment, adherence to interventions, and completion of study tools to inform the design of a robust Phase III effectiveness trial. Secondary outcomes are the effects of study interventions on body weight and composition, functional status, nutritional intake, biochemistry, fatigue, harms, survival and quality of life. Primary and secondary efficacy analysis will be conducted at 12 weeks. Additional exploratory efficacy and safety analyses will also be conducted at 24 weeks to collect data over longer treatment duration. The feasibility of economic evaluations in Phase III trial will be assessed, including the indicative costs and benefits of anamorelin for SCLC to the healthcare system and society, the choice of methods for data collection and the future evaluation design. Trial registration. The trial has been registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry [ACTRN12622000129785] and approved by the South Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee [2021/ETH11339]. https://clin.larvol.com/trial-detail/ACTRN12622000129785.

A think-aloud study of the feasibility of patients with end-stage organ failure completing the ICECAP-SCM

BACKGROUND

The ICECAP-Supportive Care Measure (SCM) is a self-complete measure developed to inform economic decision making at the end-of-life. Previous research has demonstrated its feasibility in hospice and nursing home settings. This is the first study of its use with patients on the organ failure trajectory.

AIM

To determine the feasibility of using the ICECAP-SCM with patients experiencing end-stage organ failure in a hospital setting.

DESIGN

Participants were asked to 'think aloud' when completing the ICECAP-SCM, ICECAP-A and EQ-5D-5L measures. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and examined for errors in comprehension, retrieval, judgement, and response by five raters. Qualitative data were collected to explore reasons for errors in completing the measures and participants' views about the measures.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Sixty patients (with end-stage renal failure n = 18; end-stage heart failure n = 21; end-stage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease n = 21) participated. Senior clinicians applied prognostic criteria to determine eligibility.

RESULTS

Participants reported that the measures were acceptable, clear, and easy to complete. Error rates in completing the measures were low (ICECAP-A = 3%,and ICECAP-SCM = 5.7% and EQ-5D-5L = 6.3%). There was some variation in responses between patients with different end-stage conditions, particularly those with symptom fluctuation. Some patients had not considered their end-of-life (i.e. advance care planning) and reported finding questions about this difficult to answer.

CONCLUSION

It is feasible to use the ICECAP-SCM with patients with end-stage organ failure receiving care in hospital settings. This study provides evidence for researchers and policy makers involved in measuring end-of-life care globally. The ICECAP-SCM can be recommended for research with patients in end-stage organ failure to appropriately capture the broader benefits of end-of-life care.

Comparison of capability and health-related quality of life instruments in capturing aspects of mental well-being in people with schizophrenia and depression

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence that assessing outcomes in terms of capability provides information beyond that of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for outcome evaluation in mental health research and clinical practice.

AIMS

To assess similarities and differences in the measurement properties of the ICECAP-A capability measure and Oxford Capabilities Questionnaire for Mental Health (OxCAP-MH) in people with schizophrenia experiencing depression, and compare these measurement properties with those of (a) the EuroQol EQ-5D-5L and EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS) and (b) mental health-specific (disease-specific) measures.

METHOD

Using data for 100 patients from the UK, measurement properties were compared using correlation analyses, Bland-Altman plots and exploratory factor analysis. Responsiveness was assessed by defining groups who worsened, improved or remained unchanged, based on whether there was a clinically meaningful change in the instrument scores between baseline and 9-month follow-up assessments.

RESULTS

The two capability instruments had stronger convergent validity with each other (Spearman's rho = 0.677) than with the HRQoL (rho = 0.354-0.431) or the mental health-specific (rho = 0.481-0.718) instruments. The OxCAP-MH tended to have stronger correlations with mental health-specific instruments than the ICECAP-A, whereas the ICECAP-A had slightly stronger correlation with the EQ-VAS. Change scores on the capability instruments correlated weakly with change scores on the HRQoL scales (rho = 0.131-0.269), but moderately with those on mental health-specific instruments for the ICECAP-A (rho = 0.355-0.451) and moderately/strongly on the OxCAP-MH (rho = 0.437-0.557).

CONCLUSIONS

Assessing outcomes in terms of capabilities for people with schizophrenia and depression provided more relevant, mental health-specific information than the EQ-5D-5L or the EQ-VAS. The ICECAP-A and the OxCAP-MH demonstrated similar psychometric properties, but the OxCAP-MH was more correlated with disease-specific instruments.

Care for capabilities: Implementing the capability approach in rehabilitation of patients with neuromuscular diseases. Study protocol of the controlled before-after ReCap-NMD study

Background

High quality care of patients with neuromuscular diseases requires a personalised approach that focuses on achieving and maintaining a level of functioning that enables them to be in a state of well-being. The capability approach states that well-being should be understood in terms of capabilities, the substantial opportunities that people have to be and do things they have reasons to value. In this Rehabilitation and Capability care for patients with Neuromuscular diseases (ReCap-NMD) study, we want to investigate whether providing care based on the capability approach (capability care) has an added value in the rehabilitation of patients with neuromuscular diseases (NMD).

Methods

Two groups of 30 adult patients with facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy or myotonic dystrophy type 1 will be included. The first group will receive rehabilitation care as usual with a follow-up period of 6 months. Then, based on theory, and experiences of patients and healthcare professionals, capability care will be developed. During the following 3 months, the multidisciplinary outpatient rehabilitation care team will be trained in providing this newly developed capability care. Subsequently, the second group will receive capability care, with a follow-up period of 6 months. A mixed methods approach is used with both qualitative and quantitative outcome measures to evaluate the effect of capability care and to perform a process evaluation. The primary outcome measure will be the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure.

Discussion

The ReCap-NMD study is the first study to design and implement a healthcare intervention based on the capability approach. The results of this study will expand our knowledge on how the capability approach can be applied in delivering and evaluating healthcare, and will show whether implementing such an intervention leads to a higher well-being for patients with NMD.

Trial registration

Registered at Trialregister.nl (Trial NL8946) on 12^th of October, 2020.

Musculoskeletal health and capability wellbeing: Associations between the HAQ-DI, ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O measures in a population survey

BACKGROUND

The capability approach has received increasing attention in wellbeing measurement in the past years, but it has still remained an underexplored area in musculoskeletal (MSK) health.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to explore the capability wellbeing in relation to MSK health, by measuring the associations between the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) physical functioning and the ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O capability wellbeing measures.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey was performed in 2019 on a representative sample of the Hungarian general adult population.

METHOD

Capability wellbeing was measured by the ICECAP-A (age-group 18-64) and ICECAP-O (age group 65+) questionnaires. MSK health was defined by the HAQ-DI, the mobility domain of the EQ-5D-3L/-5L health status measures, self-reported walking problems and MSK diagnosis (neck/back/low back defects, hip/knee arthrosis, osteoporosis).

RESULTS

Altogether 2021 individuals (female: 50.1%) participated in the survey with mean (SD) age of 48.7 (17.9) years and HAQ-DI of 0.138 (0.390). ICECAP-A (N = 1568, 77.6%) and ICECAP-O (N = 453, 22.4%) scores were on average (SD) 0.894 (0.126) and 0.828 (0.150), respectively. Spearman correlations between the HAQ-DI and ICECAP-A/-O index scores were moderate (r = -0.303 and -0.496; p < 0.05). Both the ICECAP-A/-O index scores differed significantly (ANOVA test, p < 0.05) across all MSK subgroups. In the ordinary least square regressions, marginal effects of ICECAP-A/-O scores on HAQ-DI were significant (-0.149 and -0.123) when controlling for socio-demographic characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

MSK health problems are associated with lower capability wellbeing. ICECAP-A/-O might capture effects of MSK conditions not measured by the HAQ-DI or the EQ-5D-5L. Further studies should test these associations in disease-specific samples.

Measurement properties of the ICECAP-A capability well-being instrument among dermatological patients

BACKGROUND

Capability well-being captures well-being based on people's ability to do the things they value in life. So far, no capability well-being measures have been validated in dermatological patients.

OBJECTIVES

To validate the adult version of the ICEpop CAPability measure (ICECAP-A) in patients with dermatological conditions. We aimed to test floor and ceiling effects, structural, convergent and known-group validity, and measurement invariance.

METHODS

In 2020, an online, cross-sectional survey was carried out in Hungary. Respondents with self-reported physician-diagnosed dermatological conditions completed the ICECAP-A, Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), WHO-5 Well-Being Index and two dermatology-specific measures, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and Skindex-16.

RESULTS

618 respondents (mean age 51 years) self-reported a physician-diagnosed dermatological condition, with warts, eczema, onychomycosis, acne and psoriasis being the most common. ICECAP-A performed well with no floor and mild ceiling effects. The violation of local independence assumption was found between the attributes of 'attachment' and 'enjoyment'. ICECAP-A index scores correlated strongly with SWLS and WHO-5 (r_s = 0.597-0.644) and weakly with DLQI and Skindex-16 (r_s = - 0.233 to - 0.292). ICECAP-A was able to distinguish between subsets of patients defined by education and income level, marital, employment and health status. Multigroup confirmatory factor analysis indicated measurement invariance across most of these subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to validate a capability well-being measure in patients with dermatological conditions. The ICECAP-A was found to be a valid tool to assess capability well-being in dermatological patients. Future work is recommended to test measurement properties of ICECAP-A in chronic inflammatory skin conditions.

Measuring capabilities in health and physical activity promotion: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The capability approach by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum has gained increasing attention in the field of public health. As it combines individual, social and structural factors and shifts the focus of attention from the actual behavior towards available options for health behaviors that people can actually choose from, it may help advance our understanding of complex health issues.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this article is to identify and describe tools available to measure capabilities within the context of health, with a specific focus on capabilities for health-enhancing physical activity.

METHOD

We conducted a systematic literature review using 11 databases covering scientific journal articles published in English or German between the years 2000 and 2020 with a focus on capabilities for health or physical activity.

RESULTS

We found a total of 51 articles meeting our inclusion criteria. Four articles measured capabilities using qualitative methods, one combined qualitative and quantitative methods, while the rest used quantitative methods. We identified a total 11 different capability questionnaires, all showing moderate to good validity/reliability. Only one questionnaire and one interview-based tool specifically dealt with capabilities for health enhancing physical activity.

CONCLUSION

Although we were able to identify measurement tools for capabilities in health, this review has shown that there is no generic tool available for the measurement across all population- and age-groups, and tools focusing on physical activity are scarce. However, our results can be used as guide for future projects that aim at measuring capabilities.

Estimating the monetary value of health and capability well-being applying the well-being valuation approach

BACKGROUND

Quality of life measures going beyond health, like the ICECAP-A, are gaining importance in health technology assessment. The assessment of the monetary value of gains in this broader quality of life is needed to use these measurements in a cost-effectiveness framework.

METHODS

We applied the well-being valuation approach to calculate a first monetary value for capability well-being in comparison to health, derived by ICECAP-A and EQ-5D-5L, respectively. Data from an online survey administered in February 2018 to a representative sample of UK citizens aged 18-65 was used (N = 1512). To overcome the endogeneity of income, we applied an instrumental variable regression. Several alternative model specifications were calculated to test the robustness of the results.

RESULTS

The base case empirical estimate for the implied monetary value of a year in full capability well-being was £66,597. The estimate of the monetary value of a QALY, obtained from the same sample and using the same methodology amounted to £30,786, which compares well to previous estimates from the willingness to pay literature. Throughout the conducted robustness checks, the value of capability well-being was found to be between 1.7 and 2.6 times larger than the value of health.

CONCLUSION

While the applied approach is not without limitations, the generated insights, especially concerning the relative magnitude of valuations, may be useful for decision-makers having to decide based on economic evaluations using the ICECAP-A measure or, to a lesser extent, other (capability) well-being outcome measures.

Measurement properties of EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in recording self-reported health status in older patients with substantial multimorbidity and polypharmacy

BACKGROUND

The EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L are two generic health-related quality of life measures, which may be used in clinical and health economic research. They measure impairment in 5 aspects of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in measuring the self-reported health status of older patients with substantial multimorbidity and associated polypharmacy.

METHODS

Between 2017 and 2019, we administered EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L to a subset of patients participating in the OPERAM trial at 6 months and 12 months after enrolment. The OPERAM trial is a two-arm multinational cluster randomised controlled trial of structured medication review assisted by a software-based decision support system versus usual pharmaceutical care, for older people (aged ≥ 70 years) with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. In the psychometric analyses, we only included participants who completed the measures in full at 6 and 12 months. We assessed whether responses to the measures were consistent by assessing the proportion of EQ-5D-5L responses, which were 2 or more levels away from that person's EQ-5D-3L response. We also compared the measures in terms of informativity, and discriminant validity and responsiveness relative to the Barthel Index, which measures independence in activities of daily living.

RESULTS

224 patients (mean age of 77 years; 56% male) were included in the psychometric analyses. Ceiling effects reported with the EQ-5D-5L (22%) were lower than with the EQ-5D-3L (29%). For the mobility item, the EQ-5D-5L demonstrated better informativity (Shannon's evenness index score of 0.86) than the EQ-5D-3L (Shannon's evenness index score of 0.69). Both the 3L and 5L versions of EQ-5D demonstrated good performance in terms of discriminant validity, i.e. (out of all items of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L, the pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression items had the weakest correlation with the Barthel Index. Both the 3L and 5L versions of EQ-5D demonstrated good responsiveness to changes in the Barthel Index.

CONCLUSION

Both EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L demonstrated validity and responsiveness when administered to older adults with substantial multimorbidity and polypharmacy who were able to complete the measures.

Empirical Validity of a Generic, Preference-Based Capability Wellbeing Instrument (ICECAP-A) in the Context of Spinal Cord Injury

BACKGROUND

Assessing the validity of generic instruments across different clinical contexts is an important area of methodological research in economic evaluation and outcomes measurement.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to examine the empirical validity of a generic, preference-based capability wellbeing instrument (ICECAP-A) in the context of spinal cord injury.

METHODS

This study consisted of a secondary analysis of data collected using an online cross-sectional survey. The survey included questions regarding demographics, injury classifications and characteristics, secondary health conditions, quality of life and wellbeing, and functioning in activities of daily living. Analysis comprised the descriptive assessment of Spearman's rank correlations between item-/dimension-level data for the ICECAP-A and four preference-based health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments, and discriminant and convergent validity approaches to examine 21 evidence-informed or theoretically derived constructs. Constructs were defined using participant and injury characteristics and responses to a range of health, wellbeing and functioning outcomes.

RESULTS

Three hundred sixty-four individuals completed the survey. Mean index score for the ICECAP-A was 0.761; 12 (3%) individuals reported full capability (upper anchor; score = 1), and there were no reports of zero capabilities (lower anchor; score = 0). The strongest correlations were dominated by items and dimensions on the comparator (HRQoL) instruments that are non-health aspects of quality of life, such as happiness and control over one's life (including self-care). Of 21 hypothesised constructs, 19 were confirmed in statistical tests, the exceptions being the exploratory hypotheses regarding education and age at injury.

CONCLUSION

The ICECAP-A is an empirically valid outcome measure for assessing capability wellbeing in people with spinal cord injury living in a community setting. The extent to which the ICECAP-A provides complementary information to preference-based HRQoL instruments is dependent on the comparator.

Capability instruments in economic evaluations of health-related interventions: a comparative review of the literature

PURPOSE

Given increasing interest in using the capability approach for health economic evaluations and a growing literature, this paper aims to synthesise current information about the characteristics of capability instruments and their application in health economic evaluations.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to assess studies that contained information on the development, psychometric properties and valuation of capability instruments, or their application in economic evaluations.

RESULTS

The review identified 98 studies and 14 instruments for inclusion. There is some evidence on the psychometric properties of most instruments. Most papers found moderate-to-high correlation between health and capability measures, ranging between 0.41 and 0.64. ASCOT, ICECAP-A, -O and -SCM instruments have published valuation sets, most frequently developed using best-worst scaling. Thirteen instruments were originally developed in English and one in Portuguese; however, some translations to other languages are available. Ten economic evaluations using capability instruments were identified. The presentation of results show a lack of consensus regarding the most appropriate way to use capability instruments in economic evaluations with discussion about capability-adjusted life years (CALYs), years of capability equivalence and the trade-off between maximisation of capability versus sufficient capability.

CONCLUSION

There has been increasing interest in applying the capability-based approach in health economic evaluations, but methodological and conceptual issues remain. There is still a need for direct comparison of the different capability instruments and for clear guidance on when and how they should be used in economic evaluations.

Happy with Your Capabilities? Valuing ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A States Based on Experienced Utility Using Subjective Well-Being Data

Background. The ICECAP-O and the ICECAP-A are validated capability well-being instruments. To be used in economic evaluations, multidimensional instruments require weighting of the distinguished well-being states. These weights are usually obtained through ex ante preference elicitation (i.e., decision utility) but could also be based on experienced utility. Objective. This article describes the development of value sets for ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A based on experienced utility and compares them with current decision utility weights. Methods. Data from 2 cross-sectional samples corresponding to the target groups of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A were used in 2 separate analyses. The utility impacts of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels were assessed through regression models using a composite measure of subjective well-being as a proxy for experienced utility. The observed utility impacts were rescaled to match the 0 to 1 range of the existing value set. Results. The calculated experienced utility values were similar to the decision utility weights for some of the ICECAP dimensions but deviated for others. The largest differences were found for weights of the ICECAP-O dimension enjoyment and the ICECAP-A dimensions attachment and autonomy. Conclusions. The results suggest a different weighting of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels if experienced utility is used instead of decision utility.

A Systematic Review of the Feasibility and Psychometric Properties of the ICEpop CAPability Measure for Adults and Its Use So Far in Economic Evaluation

OBJECTIVES

Development of the ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults (ICECAP-A) was reported in 2012; use of certain capability measures was suggested in the context of social or long-term care soon afterward by decision-making organizations in the United Kingdom and The Netherlands. Despite enthusiasm for the ICECAP-A, this study represents the first attempt to collate evidence on its psychometric properties and its use in economic analysis.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies published between January 2012 and February 2019 that have either explored the psychometric properties of the ICECAP-A (validity, reliability, and responsiveness) or report its use in economic analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies were identified, 11 undertaking some form of economic analysis (including pilot and feasibility studies) and 16 assessing psychometric properties (7 assessing construct validity). The ICECAP-A has mainly been used in the United Kingdom, but also in other English-speaking countries and in Europe, across a wide range of healthcare contexts. There is promising evidence on content validity, construct validity, and responsiveness. Although there was consistently strong associations between the ICECAP-A and the Assessment of Quality of Life-Eight Dimension, associations with the EuroQol 5-dimension 3-level and EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level were inconsistent. In some cases, it was found that a switch in evaluative space from health to capability well-being would alter resource allocation decisions.

CONCLUSION

The ICECAP-A is correlated with health-related quality of life but is most appropriately regarded as a complement for and not a substitute to the EuroQol 5-dimension 3-level and EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level in particular. Positive evidence of the measure's content and construct validity is beginning to accumulate, but further conceptual and policy debate is needed regarding the equity implications of switching between evaluative spaces.

Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Analysis of the Persian Version of the ICEpop CAPability Measure for Adults Capability Measure in the Iranian General Population

OBJECTIVES

The ICEpop CAPability measure for adults (ICECAP-A) is a measure of capability well-being for adults and, by focusing on more than health, can extend the evaluative space of economic evaluations. The aim of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the ICECAP-A questionnaire into Persian to assess the construct validity and reliability of the ICECAP-A in the Iranian general population.

METHODS

In this study, we followed Beaton's guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. The questionnaire was administered to a sample of 1200 members of the general population using a stratified probability sampling method. The construct validity and reliability of the ICECAP-A were evaluated in relation to the EuroQol 5-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L).

RESULTS

After translating and adapting the questionnaire, the term "being settled" was changed to "stability" for the Iranian cultural context. A moderate correlation (r = 0.48) was found between the ICECAP-A and EQ-5D-5L index scores, and the ICECAP-A scores showed differences across different health and socio-economic groups. The results of the exploratory factor analysis indicated that the 2 instruments measured 2 different constructs. In terms of reliability, the internal consistency of the measure using Cronbach's alpha was found to be 0.82 and for test-retest reliability, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was found to be 0.90 for total scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that the Persian version of the ICECAP-A is a valid and reliable questionnaire and can complement EQ-5D measures already used in Iran.

Gestational route to healthy birth (GaRBH): protocol for an Indian prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Pregnancy is characterised by a high rate of metabolic shifts from early to late phases of gestation in order to meet the raised physiological and metabolic needs. This change in levels of metabolites is influenced by gestational weight gain (GWG), which is an important characteristic of healthy pregnancy. Inadequate/excessive GWG has short-term and long-term implications on maternal and child health. Exploration of gestational metabolism is required for understanding the quantitative changes in metabolite levels during the course of pregnancy. Therefore, our aim is to study trimester-specific variation in levels of metabolites in relation to GWG and its influence on fetal growth and newborn anthropometric traits at birth.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A prospective longitudinal study is planned (start date: February 2018; end date: March 2023) on pregnant women that are being recruited in the first trimester and followed in subsequent trimesters and at the time of delivery (total 3 follow-ups). The study is being conducted in a hospital located in Bikaner district (66% rural population), Rajasthan, India. The estimated sample size is of 1000 mother-offspring pairs. Information on gynaecological and obstetric history, socioeconomic position, diet, physical activity, tobacco and alcohol consumption, depression, anthropometric measurements and blood samples is being collected for metabolic assays in each trimester using standardised methods. Mixed effects regression models will be used to assess the role of gestational weight in influencing metabolite levels in each trimester. The association of maternal levels of metabolites with fetal growth, offspring's weight and body composition at birth will be investigated using regression modelling.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by the ethics committees of the Department of Anthropology, University of Delhi and Sardar Patel Medical College, Rajasthan. We are taking written informed consent after discussing the various aspects of the study with the participants in the local language.

Measuring broader wellbeing in mental health services: validity of the German language OxCAP-MH capability instrument

PURPOSE

The OxCAP-MH capabilities questionnaire was developed and validated in the UK for outcome measurement in mental health clinical studies. Its broader wellbeing construct or validity in routine mental health services so far has not been assessed. The objectives were to investigate the extent the OxCAP-MH measures broader wellbeing compared to the EQ-5D-5L and to test psychometric properties of the German language OxCAP-MH in routine mental health services in Austria.

METHODS

Study sample consisted of patients in socio-psychiatric services (n = 159) assessed at baseline and 6-month follow-up. Underlying factors associated with quality-of-life/wellbeing concepts measured by the OxCAP-MH and EQ-5D-5L were identified in exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Responsiveness was assessed using anchor questionnaires and standardised response mean (SRM). For discriminant validity, subgroups of respondents were compared using t test and one-way ANOVA. Test-retest analysis was assessed for a period of maximum 30 days from the baseline assessment with intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC).

RESULTS

EFA identified a two-factor structure. All EQ-5D-5L items and seven OxCAP-MH items loaded on one factor and nine remaining OxCAP-MH items loaded on a separate factor. Responsiveness was found for patients who improved in anchor questionnaire scores with large or moderate SRM statistics. OxCAP-MH discriminated between various groups in univariable and multivariable analyses. Reliability of the German language OxCAP-MH was confirmed by ICC of 0.80.

CONCLUSIONS

Besides providing evidence that the OxCAP-MH measures broader wellbeing constructs beyond traditional health-related quality of life, the study also confirms the validity of the instrument for implementation in routine evaluation of mental health services.

Using path analysis to investigate the relationships between standardized instruments that measure health-related quality of life, capability wellbeing and subjective wellbeing: An application in the context of spinal cord injury

While economic evaluations typically embrace health maximization as the maximization objective using quality-adjusted life years, there is increasing interest in the measurement of capability wellbeing and subjective wellbeing (SWB) for informing policy decisions. The objective of this study was to investigate the relationships between health-related quality of life (HRQoL), capability wellbeing and SWB. Data were used from 364 individuals living with spinal cord injury (SCI) who previously completed a web-based, cross-sectional survey (March-June 2013). Regression analyses were used to study the impacts of secondary health conditions on HRQoL, capability wellbeing and SWB; subsequently, a path analysis was used to assess direct and mediated pathways. HRQoL was measured using the EQ-5D-5L and the Assessment of Quality of Life 8-dimension (AQoL-8D) questionnaire; capability wellbeing was assessed using the ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults (ICECAP-A), and SWB was based on a single life satisfaction item (0-10 rating scale). Mean scores were 0.492, 0.573, 0.761 and 6.319 for EQ-5D-5L, AQoL-8D, ICECAP-A and SWB, respectively. Beta coefficients from the regression analyses indicated that secondary health conditions had the greatest negative impact on individuals' HRQoL (β_AQoL-8D = -0.668, β_EQ-5D-5L = -0.542), followed by SWB (β_SWB = -0.481) and capability wellbeing (β_ICECAP-A = -0.477). Capability wellbeing mediated the effect of secondary health conditions on HRQoL and SWB. The indirect effect of secondary health conditions on SWB through HRQoL was not statistically significant when using EQ-5D-5L; indirect effects were found when using AQoL-8D, one through HRQoL only and one through both capability wellbeing and HRQoL. This study highlights the different impacts of secondary health conditions on HRQoL, capability and SWB in the context of SCI. While the greatest impact was observed on individuals' HRQoL, our results provide further evidence that capability wellbeing (here, the ICECAP-A) adds complementary information about outcomes that could be used in economic evaluation.

Adaptation and assessments of the Chinese version of the ICECAP-A measurement

BACKGROUND

This study adapts the ICECAP measure for Adults (ICECAP-A) to assess its capacity to measure the quality of life in China for economic evaluation.

METHODS

Qualitative and quantitative methods were used to translate the ICECAP-A measure for wellbeing, established by the University of Birmingham, UK, to the Chinese cultural context. A focus group discussion solved the appropriateness and wording of the ICECAP attributes in Chinese; and a randomly selected sample of 1000 adults aged over 18 years were online surveyed. We conducted psychometric tests and compared the factors influencing the ICECAP-A measure with those influencing EQ-5D-3 L.

RESULTS

Members of the focus group discussion agreed that the five attributes of the ICECAP-A measure are sufficient to evaluate wellbeing in China. However, the terms "being settled" and "friendship" were changed to "stability" and "kindness" for the Chinese cultural context. Our results show that the Chinese version of ICECAP-A has good internal consistency with an overall Cronbach's Alpha coefficient of 0.7999. The concurrent validity indicates that ICECAP-A is moderately correlated with EQ-5D-3 L (r ≤ 0.52).

CONCLUSIONS

The ICECAP-A measure can be adapted to evaluate wellbeing in China, but cultural changes to the wording are necessary. It is a valid measurement of wellbeing and can complement the EQ-5D already used in China. However, further work is still needed to evaluate the sensitivity of the ICECAP-A measure in relation to public health and social care.

Do capability and functioning differ? A study of U.K. survey responses

A core feature of the capability approach is that a person's capabilities (what they are able to do and be in their life) can differ from their functionings (what they actually do and are in their life). However, the degree to which capability and functioning differ in practice is unclear. This paper investigates this issue, focusing on capability and functioning differences (CFD) across different aspects of life and different individuals. In the study, the ICECAP-A capability questionnaire was modified to measure both functionings and capabilities and was completed by U.K.-based convenience sample of 943 people. Around one third of people reported CFD in at least one area of their life, most commonly in terms of their "achievement." People were more likely to report CFD when they had a degree-level education and when they had impaired health. An additional finding was that capability varied more with education whereas functioning varied more with health status. This finding needs further examination, but it suggests that the choice of evaluative space may influence how priorities are set for public spending.

Are Quality-Adjusted Life Years a Good Proxy Measure of Individual Capabilities?

BACKGROUND

There is a debate in the health economics literature concerning the most appropriate way of applying Amartya Sen's capability approach in economic evaluation studies. Some suggest that quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) alone are adequate while others argue that this approach is too narrow and that direct measures of capability wellbeing provide a more extensive application of Sen's paradigm.

OBJECTIVE

This paper empirically explores whether QALYs provide a good proxy for individual capabilities.

METHODS

Data is taken from a multinational cross-sectional survey of individuals with seven health conditions (asthma, arthritis, cancer, depression, diabetes, hearing loss, heart disease) and a healthy population. Each individual completed the ICECAP-A measure of capability wellbeing for adults and six health utility instruments that are used to generate QALYs, including EQ-5D and SF-6D. Primary analysis examines how well health utility instruments can explain variation in the ICECAP-A using ordinary least squares regression.

RESULTS

The findings show that all seven health conditions have a negative association on overall capability as measured by the ICECAP-A index. Inclusion of health utility instruments into separate regressions improves the predictive power of capability but on average, explains less than half of the variation in capability wellbeing. Individuals with arthritis appear to be less inhibited in terms of capability losses when accounting for health utility, yet those who have depression record significant reductions in capability relative to the healthy population even after accounting for the most commonly used health utility instruments.

CONCLUSION

The study therefore casts doubt on the ability of QALYs to act as a reliable proxy measure of individuals' capability.

Assessing the validity of the ICECAP-A capability measure for adults with depression

BACKGROUND

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness are increasingly important considerations in determining which mental health services are funded. Questions have been raised concerning the validity of generic health status instruments used in economic evaluation for assessing mental health problems such as depression; measuring capability wellbeing offers a possible alternative. The aim of this study is to assess the validity of the ICECAP-A capability instrument for individuals with depression.

METHODS

Hypotheses were developed using concept mapping. Validity tests and multivariable regression analysis were applied to data from a cross-sectional dataset to assess the performance of ICECAP-A in individuals who reported having a primary condition of depression. The ICECAP-A was collected alongside instruments used to measure: 1. depression using the depression scale of the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-D of DASS-21); 2. mental health using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10); 3. generic health status using a common measure collected for use in economic evaluations, the five level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L).

RESULTS

Hypothesised associations between the ICECAP-A (items and index scores) and depression constructs were fully supported in statistical tests. In the multivariable analysis, instruments designed specifically to measure depression and mental health explained a greater proportion of the variation in ICECAP-A than the EQ-5D-5L.

CONCLUSION

The ICECAP-A instrument appears to be suitable for assessing outcome in adults with depression for resource allocation purposes. Further research is required on its responsiveness and use in economic evaluation. Using a capability perspective when assessing cost-effectiveness could potentially re-orientate resource provision across physical and mental health care services.

Measuring Health and Broader Well-Being Benefits in the Context of Opiate Dependence: The Psychometric Performance of the ICECAP-A and the EQ-5D-5L

BACKGROUND

Measuring outcomes in economic evaluations of social care interventions is challenging because both health and well-being benefits are evident. The ICEpop CAPability instrument for adults (ICECAP-A) and the five-level EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) are measures potentially suitable for the economic evaluation of treatments for substance use disorders. Evidence for their validity in this context is, however, lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the construct validity of the ICECAP-A and the EQ-5D-5L in terms of convergent and discriminative validity and sensitivity to change on the basis of standard clinical measures (Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation-Outcome Measure, Treatment Outcomes Profile, Interpersonal Support Evaluation List, Leeds Dependence Questionnaire, and Social Satisfaction Questionnaire).

METHODS

A secondary analysis of pilot trial data for heroin users in opiate substitution treatment was conducted. Baseline convergence with clinical measures was assessed using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Discriminative validity was assessed using one-way analysis of variance and stepwise regressions. Sensitivity to changes in clinical indicators was assessed at 3 and 12 months using the standardized response mean statistic and parametric and nonparametric testing.

RESULTS

Both measures had the same level of construct validity, except for clinical indicators of well-being, for which the ICECAP-A performed better. The ICECAP-A was sensitive to changes in both health and well-being indicators. The EQ-5D-5L had lower levels of sensitivity to change, and a ceiling effect (27%), particularly evident in the dimensions of self-care (89%), mobility (75%), and usual activities (72%).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings support the construct validity of both measures, but the ICECAP-A gives more attention to broader impacts and is more sensitive to change. The ICECAP-A shows promise in evaluating treatments for substance use disorders for which recovery is the desired outcome.

The validity and responsiveness of the ICECAP-A capability-well-being measure in women with irritative lower urinary tract symptoms

Purpose

A desire to incorporate broader aspects of well-being in health economic evaluations has led to the development of the ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults (ICECAP-A). The ICECAP-A draws upon Amartya Sen’s capability approach and conceptualises well-being as the capability to achieve Stability, Attachment, Autonomy, Achievement, and Enjoyment. The aim of this study was to assess the psychometric performance of the ICECAP-A in a context where patient outcomes can extend beyond health-related quality of life.

Methods

Longitudinal data were collected for 478 women with symptoms of urinary frequency and urgency, with or without incontinence. Women were recruited across 22 hospitals in the UK and had a mean age of 55 (SD 14). The psychometric performance of the measure was evaluated in relation to the EuroQol Five-Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire for Overactive Bladder (ICIQ-OAB) and involved an assessment of acceptability, construct validity, and responsiveness using parametric and nonparametric methods.

Results

ICECAP-A showed good convergence with the ICIQ-OAB with 20 out of 22 expected patterns of relationship confirmed. Findings suggested that the ICECAP-A has better discriminative properties than EQ-5D-3L and as good as those of the ICIQ-OAB, confirming expected associations with clinical and demographic factors. The ICECAP-A was more responsive than EQ-5D-3L and ICIQ-OAB to deteriorations of clinical symptoms. Improvements in symptoms were not valued as highly as deteriorations by either ICECAP-A or EQ-5D-3L.

Conclusions

The ICECAP-A is a valid and responsive measure capturing broad emotional and practical impacts of urinary symptoms on women’s well-being and could be considered for use in economic evaluations in this context.

The Relative Impacts of Disease on Health Status and Capability Wellbeing: A Multi-Country Study

BACKGROUND

Evaluations of the impact of interventions for resource allocation purposes commonly focus on health status. There is, however, also concern about broader impacts on wellbeing and, increasingly, on a person's capability. This study aims to compare the impact on health status and capability of seven major health conditions, and highlight differences in treatment priorities when outcomes are measured by capability as opposed to health status.

METHODS

The study was a cross-sectional four country survey (n = 6650) of eight population groups: seven disease groups with: arthritis, asthma, cancer, depression, diabetes, hearing loss, and heart disease and one health population 'comparator' group. Two simple self-complete questionnaires were used to measure health status (EQ-5D-5L) and capability (ICECAP-A). Individuals were classified by illness severity using condition-specific questionnaires. Effect sizes were used to estimate: (i) the difference in health status and capability for those with conditions, relative to a healthy population; and (ii) the impact of the severity of the condition on health status and capability within each disease group.

FINDINGS

5248 individuals were included in the analysis. Individuals with depression have the greatest mean reduction in both health (effect size, 1.26) and capability (1.22) compared to the healthy population. The effect sizes for capability for depression are much greater than for all other conditions, which is not the case for health. For example, the arthritis group effect size for health (1.24) is also high and similar to that of depression, whereas for the same arthritis group, the effect size for capability is much lower than that for depression (0.55). In terms of severity within disease groups, individuals categorised as 'mild' have similar capability levels to the healthy population (effect sizes <0.2, excluding depression) but lower health status than the healthy population (≥0.4).

CONCLUSION

Significant differences exist in the relative effect sizes across diseases when measured by health status and capability. In terms of treating morbidity, a shift in focus from health gain to capability gain would increase funding priorities for patients with depression specifically and severe illnesses more generally.