Delphi Consensus for Core Outcome Set for Measuring Patient Outcomes After ICU
Instrument EQ - 5D (3 Level or 5 Level)
Acronym
Core Domain
Area assessed (Number of
questions)
Description
Versions
Recall Period
Scoring information
Estimated time to complete
Administer to
Require trained administrator
Mode of administration
Order from
Licensing Fee
Fees and licensing information is effective as
of 2016, but is subject to change over time
Equipment required
Number of published Critical
Care publications using
instrument *
Highest COSMIN** rating
(from a systematic review***)
EQ-5D (3L or 5L)
Satisfaction with Life, or Personal Enjoyment
Total questions: 6
Mobility: 1
Self-Care: 1
Usual Activities: 1
Pain/discomfort: 1
Anxiety/depression: 1
Health State - Visual Analog Scale: 1
A self-report questionnaire of health status or health-related quality of life.
3L (3 response options for each question)
5L (5 response options for each question)
Multiple languages
Today
3L - 3 levels of severity: no problems, some problems, extreme problems.
5L - 5 levels of severity: no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe
problems, extreme problems.
The visual analog scale ranges from 0 to 100 with higher scores reflecting better perceived
current health-related quality of life state.
2 minutes
Patient (possibly to a proxy (e.g. family member), but results may differ from patient
responses)
No
In-person, Phone, Mail
http://www.euroqol.org/eq-5d-products/how-to-obtain-eq-5d.html
Licensing fees determined by the EuroQol Executive Office on the basis of the user
information provided on the registration form. The amount is determined by the type of
study/trial/project, funding source, sample size, and number of requested languages. Your
project may not be required to pay licensing fee.
Survey form and pen
43
Kaarlola, 2004
• Construct Validity: (Compared to RAND-36, Spearman’s Rank Order (correlation
coefficient 0.57 - 0.69 for the 8 domains, and 0.48 for mental component sum and
0.62 for physical component sum) all p-values ≤ 0.001, n = 1099); COSMIN: FAIR
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Khoudri, 2012
For all 5 Dimensions and Index score
• Reliability (Test-retest, 1 week interval, κ statistics range 0.49 - 0.92 for 5 Dimensions,
Intraclass Correlation=0.95 for Index Score, n=83); COSMIN: FAIR for 5 Dimensions,
GOOD for Index score
• Criterion Validity (Compared to Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 domains, for 5
Last updated on April 15, 2016. If you are aware of any updates required for this document, please notify us via [email protected].
This work, created by Dale M. Needham, MD, PhD and the Johns Hopkins University Outcomes After Critical Illness & Surgery (OACIS)
Group, was funded by NHLBI R24HL111895, and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0
International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/.
Page 1 of 2
Delphi Consensus for Core Outcome Set for Measuring Patient Outcomes After ICU
Additional comments
Online Example:
Dimensions: those with no-problems had higher Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36
scores for each domain than those moderate/extreme problems (p<0.001), for Index
score Spearman r=0.53-0.87, all p<0.001,n=145); COSMIN: EXCELLENT for 5 Dimensions
and Index score
Visual Analog Scale
• Reliability (Test-retest, 1 week interval, Intraclass Correlation=0.92, n=83);
COSMIN: GOOD
• Criterion Validity (Compared to Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 domains,
Pearson r=0.42-0.70, all p<0.001 ); COSMIN: EXCELLENT
None
http://www.aaos.org/uploadedFiles/EQ5D3L.pdf
*Turnbull, A.E. et al. Outcome Measurement in ICU Survivorship Research from 1970-2013: A Scoping Review of 425 Publications. Critical Care Medicine. 2016. In Press.
** COSMIN is used to rate a study's evaluation of a survey or test's measurement properties. COSMIN does NOT rate the instrument itself, but helps readers understand if they can have
confidence in the results of studies evaluating measurement properties of surveys and tests. For example, a rigorous study evaluating a test with poor measurement properties will receive a
“good” COSMIN rating, while a poorly-conducted study evaluating a test with good measurement properties will receive a “poor” COSMIN rating. You must consider both the COSMIN rating and
the results of studies provided when forming your opinion about that test. If more than one paper evaluated the same measurement property for a given test/survey, we present data from the
paper with a better COSMIN score. COSMIN ratings were only performed for studies evaluating instruments used in ICU survivors after ICU discharge.
***Robinson, K.A. et al. A systematic review finds limited data on measurement properties of instruments measuring outcomes in adult intensive care unit survivors. Under Peer Review.
Last updated on April 15, 2016. If you are aware of any updates required for this document, please notify us via [email protected].
This work, created by Dale M. Needham, MD, PhD and the Johns Hopkins University Outcomes After Critical Illness & Surgery (OACIS)
Group, was funded by NHLBI R24HL111895, and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0
International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/.
Page 2 of 2