Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3961/jpmph.22.020

Health-related Quality of Life Instrument With 8 Items for Use in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Validation Study in Korea  

Kim, Juyoung (Asan Medical Institute of Convergence Science and Technology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine)
Lee, Hyeon-Jeong (National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency)
Jo, Min-Woo (Asan Medical Institute of Convergence Science and Technology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine)
Publication Information
Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health / v.55, no.3, 2022 , pp. 234-242 More about this Journal
Abstract
Objectives: This study assessed the validity and reliability of the Health-related Quality of Life Instrument with 8 Items (HINT-8) in patients with diabetes. HINT-8 is a newly-developed, generic health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instrument. Methods: Three HRQoL instruments-HINT-8, EuroQoL 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L), and Short Form Health Survey version 2.0 (SF-36v2)-were provided to 300 patients with diabetes visiting a tertiary hospital for follow-up visits in Korea. The HRQoL scores obtained using the HINT-8 were evaluated for subgroups with known differences based on demographics and diabetes-related characteristics (known-group validity). The mean scores of the instruments were compared between groups segmented by their responses to the HINT-8 (discriminatory ability). Correlation coefficients of the HINT-8 with other instruments were calculated (convergent and divergent validity). The Cohen kappa and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were also evaluated (test-retest reliability). Results: The average HINT-8 indexes were lower among women, older, and less-educated subjects. Subjects who did not list any problems on the HINT-8 had significantly higher HRQoL scores than those who did. The correlation coefficients of the HINT-8 with the EQ-5D-5L index and EuroQoL visual analogue scale were 0.715 (p<0.001) and 0.517 (p<0.001), respectively. The correlation coefficients between the HINT-8 index and the scores of 8 domains of the SF-36v2 ranged from 0.478 (p<0.001) to 0.669 (p<0.001). The Cohen kappa values for the HINT-8 ranged from 0.268 to 0.601, and the ICC of the HINT-8 index was 0.800 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.720 to 0.860). Conclusions: This study showed that the HINT-8 is a valid and reliable HRQoL instrument for patients with diabetes.
Keywords
Diabetes mellitus; Type 2; EQ-5D-5L; HINT-8; Quality of life; Reproducibility of results;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33(1):159-174.   DOI
2 Janssen MF, Bonsel GJ, Luo N. Is EQ-5D-5L better than EQ-5D-3L? A head-to-head comparison of descriptive systems and value sets from seven countries. Pharmacoeconomics 2018;36(6):675-697.   DOI
3 Karimi M, Brazier J. Health, health-related quality of life, and quality of life: what is the difference? Pharmacoeconomics 2016;34(7):645-649.   DOI
4 Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. Guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals. 2nd ed. Wonju: Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service; 2011, p. 10 (Korean).
5 Jo MW. Development of the measurement tool for health related quality of life in the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Cheongju: Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2014, p. 97 (Korean).
6 Kim SK, Kim SH, Jo MW, Lee SI. Estimation of minimally important differences in the EQ-5D and SF-6D indices and their utility in stroke. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2015;13:32.   DOI
7 Viera AJ, Garrett JM. Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med 2005;37(5):360-363.
8 Kim TH, Jo MW, Lee SI, Kim SH, Chung SM. Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in the general population of South Korea. Qual Life Res 2013;22(8):2245-2253.   DOI
9 Ock M, Jo MW, Lee SI. Measuring health related quality of life using EQ-5D in South Korea. J Health Tech Assess 2013;1(1):103-111 (Korean).
10 Kim SH, Jo MW, Lee SI. Psychometric properties of the Korean short form-36 health survey version 2 for assessing the general population. Asian Nurs Res (Korean Soc Nurs Sci) 2013;7(2):61-66.   DOI
11 Maruish ME. User's manual for the SF-36v2 health survey. 3rd ed. Lincoln: Quality Metric Incorporated; 2011, p. 198.
12 Lee HJ, Jo MW, Choi SH, Kim YJ, Oh KW. Development and psychometric evaluation of measurement instrument for Korean health-related quality of life. Public Health Wkly Rep 2016;9(24):447-454 (Korean).
13 Hu J, Gruber KJ, Hsueh KH. Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the SF-36 in older adults with diabetes in Beijing, China. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2010;88(3):273-281.   DOI
14 Jo MW. Valuation of Korean health-related quality of life instrument with 8 items (HINT-8). Cheongju: Korean Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2017, p. 28 (Korean).
15 Brazier JE, Roberts J. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Med Care 2004;42(9):851-859.   DOI
16 Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014, p. 177.
17 Forssas E, Arffman M, Manderbacka K, Keskimaki I, Ruuth I, Sund R. Multiple complications among people with diabetes from Finland: an 18-year follow-up in 1994-2011. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care 2016;4(1):e000254.   DOI
18 Fayers PM, Hays R, Hays RD. Assessing quality of life in clinical trials: methods and practice. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005, p. 421.
19 Mulhern B, Meadows K. The construct validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D, SF-6D and diabetes health profile-18 in type 2 diabetes. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2014;12:42.   DOI
20 Koh D, Abdullah AM, Wang P, Lin N, Luo N. Validation of Brunei's Malay EQ-5D questionnaire in patients with type 2 diabetes. PLoS One 2016;11(11):e0165555.   DOI
21 Kim KJ, Kwon TY, Yu S, Seo JA, Kim NH, Choi KM, et al. Ten-year mortality trends for adults with and without diabetes mellitus in South Korea, 2003 to 2013. Diabetes Metab J 2018;42(5):394-401.   DOI
22 Janssen MF, Birnie E, Haagsma JA, Bonsel GJ. Comparing the standard EQ-5D three-level system with a five-level version. Value Health 2008;11(2):275-284.   DOI
23 Harding JL, Pavkov ME, Magliano DJ, Shaw JE, Gregg EW. Global trends in diabetes complications: a review of current evidence. Diabetologia 2019;62(1):3-16.   DOI
24 Won JC, Lee JH, Kim JH, Kang ES, Won KC, Kim DJ, et al. Diabetes fact sheet in korea, 2016: an appraisal of current status. Diabetes Metab J 2018;42(5):415-424.   DOI
25 Kim SH, Jo MW, Lee JW, Lee HJ, Kim JK. Validity and reliability of EQ-5D-3L for breast cancer patients in Korea. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2015;13:203.   DOI
26 Cho NH, Shaw JE, Karuranga S, Huang Y, da Rocha Fernandes JD, Ohlrogge AW, et al. IDF Diabetes Atlas: global estimates of diabetes prevalence for 2017 and projections for 2045. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2018;138:271-281.   DOI
27 Lee JW, Kang HT, Lim HJ, Park B. Trends in diabetes prevalence among Korean adults based on Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys III-VI. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2018;138:57-65.   DOI
28 Megari K. Quality of life in chronic disease patients. Health Psychol Res 2013;1(3):e27.   DOI
29 El Achhab Y, Nejjari C, Chikri M, Lyoussi B. Disease-specific health-related quality of life instruments among adults diabetic: a systematic review. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2008;80(2):171-184.   DOI
30 Lee EH, Kim CJ, Cho SY, Chae HJ, Lee S, Kim EJ. Monitoring the use of health-related quality of life measurements in Korean studies of patients with diabetes. J Korean Acad Nurs 2011;41(4):558-567(Korean).   DOI
31 Kiadaliri AA, Eliasson B, Gerdtham UG. Does the choice of EQ-5D tariff matter? A comparison of the Swedish EQ-5D-3L index score with UK, US, Germany and Denmark among type 2 diabetes patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2015;13:145.   DOI
32 Kim SH, Ahn J, Ock M, Shin S, Park J, Luo N, et al. The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Korea. Qual Life Res 2016;25(7):1845-1852.   DOI
33 Kim SH, Hwang JS, Kim TW, Hong YS, Jo MW. Validity and reliability of the EQ-5D for cancer patients in Korea. Support Care Cancer 2012;20(12):3155-3160.   DOI
34 Lee WJ, Song KH, Noh JH, Choi YJ, Jo MW. Health-related quality of life using the EuroQol 5D questionnaire in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes. J Korean Med Sci 2012;27(3):255-260.   DOI
35 Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002;21(2):271-292.   DOI
36 Kim SH, Kim HJ, Lee SI, Jo MW. Comparing the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in cancer patients in Korea. Qual Life Res 2012;21(6):1065-1073.   DOI
37 Lee YK, Nam HS, Chuang LH, Kim KY, Yang HK, Kwon IS, et al. South Korean time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states: modeling with observed values for 101 health states. Value Health 2009;12(8):1187-1193.   DOI
38 van Reenen M, Janssen B. EQ-5D-5L user guide: basic information on how to use the EQ-5D-5L instrument. Rotterdam: EuroQol Research Foundation; 2015, p. 9.
39 Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 2016;15(2):155-163.   DOI
40 Janssen MF, Pickard AS, Golicki D, Gudex C, Niewada M, Scalone L, et al. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study. Qual Life Res 2013;22(7):1717-1727.   DOI