- •International guidelines identify development, evaluation, and implementation of new interventions to improve quality of life for older people with frailty as a key priority.
- •Evidence on normative estimates and agreement for different measures of health-related quality of life across the spectrum of frailty is critical for designing interventions and cost-effectiveness evaluation.
- •Researchers should consider using the short-form 36-item health questionnaire in frailty or the short-form 6-dimension if fit older people are the planned target. In interventions involving older people with increasing frailty, both the EuroQol 5-dimension health questionnaire and short-form 6-dimension should be included.
Cumulative deficit model
Electronic frailty index (eFI)
EuroQol 5-dimension health questionnaire, 5-level version (EQ-5D-5L)
Methods of Assessment
|Cumulative deficit model||Fit||28.3|
|Electronic frailty index||Fit||22.4|
|General health perceptions||62.24||75.70||65.34||48.46||77.63||70.54||61.63||43.21||74.80||65.28||55.14||46.53|
|All||Fit||Phenotype||Very fit||Frailty Index||Frail||Fit||eFI||Moderate||Severe|
Correlation between EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D dimensions
- Supplemental Materials
- Study protocol for the World Health Organization project to develop a Quality of Life assessment instrument (WHOQOL).Qual Life Res. 1993; 2: 153-159
- Fit for frailty. British Geriatrics Society.
- Multimorbidity: clinical assessment and management. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.
- Living well with chronic illness: a call for public health action.Mil Med. 2015; 180: 485-487
- Quality of life in older people: a structured review of self-assessed health instruments.Qual Life Res. 2006; 6: 181-194
- Quality of life is substantially worse for community-dwelling older people living with frailty: systematic review and meta-analysis.Qual Life Res. 2019; 28: 2041-2056
- Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg9/resources/guide-to-the-methods-of-technology-appraisal-2013-pdf-2007975843781Date accessed: September 25, 2019
- International regulations and recommendations for utility data for health technology assessment.Pharmacoeconomics. 2017; 35: 11-19
- Summary of guidance on health-utility measures by selected health technology assessment agencies. RTI Health Solutions.https://www.rtihs.org/sites/default/files/HTA_document_4_March_2019.pdfDate accessed: September 25, 2019
- A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups.Health Econ. 2004; 13: 873-884
- A comparison of the performance of the EQ-5D and SF-6D for individuals aged ≥ 45 years.Health Econ. 2008; 17: 815-832
- Community ageing research 75+ study (CARE75+): an experimental ageing and frailty research cohort.BMJ Open. 2019; 9e026744
- Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype.J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001; 56: M146-M156
- Cohort differences in the levels and trajectories of frailty among older people in England.J Epidemiol Community Health. 2015; 69: 316-321
- Frailty, financial resources and subjective well-being in later life.Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2014; 58: 364-369
- Development and validation of an electronic frailty index using routine primary care electronic health record data.Age Ageing. 2016; 45: 353-360
- Valuing health-related quality of life: an EQ-5D-5L value set for England.Health Econ. 2017; 27: 7-22
- 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: 675-697
- Measurement in medicine: the analysis of method comparison studies.Statistician. 1983; 32: 307-317
- Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.Lancet. 1986; 327: 307-310
- Another study showing that two preference-based measures of health-related quality of life (EQ-5D and SF-6D) are not interchangeable. But why should we expect them to be?.Value Health. 2011; 14: 531-538
- Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-£L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study.Qual Life Res. 2012; 22: 1717-1727
- Measurement properties of the EQ-5D across four major geriatric conditions: findings from TOPICS-MDS.Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017; 15
- Valuing health-related quality of life: systematic variation in health perception.Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017; 15: 45
- Measuring health-related quality of life of care home residents, comparison of self-report with staff proxy responses for EQ-5D-5L and HowRu: protocol for assessing proxy reliability in care home outcomes testing.BMJ Open. 2018; 8e022127
- Position statement on use of the EQ-5D-5L valuation set for England (updated October 2019). National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.https://www.nice.org.uk/about/what-we-do/our-programmes/nice-guidance/technology-appraisal-guidance/eq-5d-5lDate accessed: September 25, 2019
- A comparison of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L.Pharmacoeconomics. 2020; 38: 575-591
Author Contributions: Concept and design: Nikolova, Pendleton, Heaven, Bower, Humphrey, Clegg
Acquisition of data: Nikolova, Heaven, Clegg
Analysis and interpretation of data: Nikolova, Hulme, West, Pendleton, Heaven, Bower, Clegg
Drafting of the manuscript: Nikolova, Hulme, West, Pendleton, Farrin, Cundill, Hawkins, Clegg
Critical revision of the paper for important intellectual content: Nikolova, Hulme, West, Pendleton, Heaven, Bower, Humphrey, Farrin, Cundill, Hawkins, Clegg
Statistical analysis: Nikolova
Provision of study materials or patients: Humphrey
Obtaining funding: Hulme, West, Pendleton, Bower, Farrin, Cundill, Hawkins, Clegg
Supervision: Pendleton, Hulme
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Drs Nikolova, Bower, and Hulme reported receiving grants from the National Institute for Health Research during the conduct of this study. Dr Nikolova reported receiving grants from The National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration, Yorkshire & Humber, during the conduct of the study. Dr Hulme sits on the National Institute for Health Research Program Grants for Applied Health Research Sub-Committee (2019-present). No other disclosures were reported.
Funding/Support: This work was supported by grant RP-PG-0216-20003 from the National Institute for Health Research Program Grant for Applied Research. Andrew Clegg, Robert West, Rebecca Hawkins and Amanda Farrin are part-funded by the National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration, Yorkshire & Humber. The views expressed are those of the author(s), and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
User LicenseElsevier user license |
For non-commercial purposes:
- Read, print & download
- Text & data mine
- Translate the article
- Reuse portions or extracts from the article in other works
- Redistribute or republish the final article
- Sell or re-use for commercial purposes
Elsevier's open access license policy