Are Asians comfortable with discussing death in health valuation studies? A study in multi-ethnic Singapore

Do Chinese have similar health-state preferences? A comparison of mainland Chinese and Singaporean Chinese

BACKGROUND

Little is known about whether health-state preferences differ among Chinese populations. This study compared the preference values for EQ-5D-5L health states between mainland Chinese and Singaporean Chinese.

METHODS

The preference values for ten EQ-5D-5L health states were elicited from general population samples of mainland Chinese and Singaporeans. In computer-assisted self-interviews, each participant completed five time trade-off (TTO) tasks to value five different EQ-5D-5L health states. The difference in TTO values between mainland Chinese and Singaporean Chinese was examined using random-effects linear regression and logistic regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 194 eligible mainland Chinese and 145 eligible Singaporean Chinese provided data for this study. All ten health states considered, the mean TTO value was 0.18 for Singaporean Chinese and 0.35 for mainland Chinese, with the unadjusted and adjusted difference [95% confidence interval (CI)] being -0.17 (-0.28, -0.07) and -0.16 (-0.27, -0.05). Singaporean Chinese had substantially lower TTO values than mainland Chinese for states with severe or extreme problems, with the adjusted difference being -0.30 (95% CI -0.42, -0.17). On the other hand, Singaporean Chinese and mainland Chinese had similar TTO values for states with mild or moderate problems, with the adjusted (95% CI) difference being 0.04 (-0.07, 0.15). Logistic regression analysis showed that Singaporean Chinese were more likely to rate health states with severe or extreme problems as worse than death compared to mainland Chinese.

CONCLUSIONS

Mainland Chinese and Singaporean Chinese have different preferences for EQ-5D-5L health states, supporting the development of local value sets for the EQ-5D-5L instrument for the two populations.

How is the most severe health state being valued by the general population?

BACKGROUND

It has been reported that valuation of health states that are close to death, such as the most severe health state, can be affected by health state valuation procedure, and their utility values are difficult to predict. We examined how the most severe health states of Short Form-6 dimension (SF-6D) and EuroQoL-5 dimension-3 level (EQ-5D-3L) were valued by the Singapore general population.

METHODS

Overall, 249 SF-6D and 42 EQ-5D-3L states were valued by two separate samples from the Singapore general population using the visual analogue scale (VAS) method. Ordinary least-square regression model was employed to explain deficit in the valuation of the most severe state using the health state descriptors.

RESULTS

A total of 1021 participants from the SF-6D sample and 1015 participants from the EQ-5D-3L sample were included in the analysis. We observed that 67% of the SF-6D participants and 74% of the EQ-5D-3L participants considered the most severe state worse than dead. The most severe state had mean VAS valuation scores more than 20-25 points lower than the adjacent states that are better by only one level in only one dimension. SF-6D VAS valuation score for the most severe state was 27 points and 12 points lower than expected according to the health state descriptors among the participants who considered the most severe state worse than dead and better than dead, respectively. Similar results were found for the EQ-5D-3L valuation.

CONCLUSIONS

The most severe health state was valued lower than expected according to its descriptors.