Article

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) refers
to the compression neuropathy of the median nerve at the wrist. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To establish the interinstrument reliability, convergent construct
validity, and the levels of agreement of health utility indexes 2 and 3 (HUI-2
and HUI-3), EuroQol 5-dimensions (EQ-5D), EuroQol-visual analog scale (EQ-VAS)
and to determine the difference of these utility measures based on age and gender
in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome. METHODS: Seventy-four patients with a
confirmed diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome completed the 3 questionnaires and
EQ-VAS a month before surgery. Demographic characteristics were reported.
Intraclass correlation coefficients were used to assess relative interinstrument
reliability. Pearson correlation coefficients (r) were used to establish
convergent construct validity. Bland-Altman plots and t tests were used to
describe the levels of agreement between the 4 utility measures. A 2-way analysis
of variance was performed to determine the effect of age and gender on the
utility measures; HUI-2, HUI-3, and EQ-5D. RESULTS: The intraclass correlation
coefficients were 0.85 for HUI-3 vs HUI-2 and 0.80 for HUI-2 vs EQ-VAS. Pearson
correlation coefficients ranged from 0.60 to 0.89; HUI-3 vs HUI-2: 0.89, and
HUI-3 vs EQ-5D: 0.60. One-sample t test demonstrated significant differences
between HUI-3 vs HUI-2, HUI-3 vs EQ-5D, and HUI-3 vs EQ-VAS measures, with mean
differences of -0.12, -0.15, and -0.14, respectively. A 2-way analysis of
variance test controlling for age and gender indicated neither as predictors of
outcome scores. CONCLUSIONS: The HUI-3 vs HUI-2 and HUI-2 vs EQ-VAS demonstrated
excellent interinstrument relative reliability measures. The HUI-3 vs HUI-2
displayed very strong convergent construct validity measures, and strong validity
measures were established between the remaining utility measures. In addition,
the pair-wise utility comparisons demonstrated minimal bias between HUI-2 vs
EQ-5D, HUI-2 vs EQ-VAS, and EQ-VAS vs EQ-5D measures. DISCUSSION: N/A. LEVEL OF
EVIDENCE: N/A.
CI - Copyright (c) 2016 Hanley & Belfus. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights
reserved.

Langue : ANGLAIS