Are condition-specific utilities more valid than generic preference-based ones in asthma? Evidence from a study comparing EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D with AQL-5D.

BACKGROUND: Systematic discrepancies have been shown in utility values derived from different instruments. This study compares utilities from the condition-specific AQL-5D and the generic EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D in an asthmatic population with heterogeneous health-related quality of life (HRQoL), disease severity, and control status.

METHODS: A consecutive sample of 104 patients diagnosed with asthma completed a survey containing the Greek versions of SF-36, EQ-5D-3L, and AQLQ(s). Treatment adequacy was assessed with the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), and asthma severity according to Global Initiative for Asthma 2016 guidelines. Association and agreement between instruments were assessed with Spearman's correlation and Bland-Altman plots.

RESULTS: AQL-5D utilities exceeded (p < 0.001) those from EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D. There were weak-to-moderate correlations (<0.5) between most dimensions of AQL-5D, and those of EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D, and strong correlations between similar dimensions of EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D. Significant differences (p < 0.001) were observed throughout the visual analog scale (VAS), asthma severity and asthma control subgroups, with AQL-5D consistently higher than EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D.

CONCLUSIONS: All instruments distinguished between differing degrees of asthma control, but only AQL-5D discriminated between asthma severity and HRQoL as well. Although the relatively small sample warrants caution in interpreting the subgroup results, this study contributes to the growing number of comparisons between condition-specific and generic preference-based instruments.