Comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities in mental health patients

L.M. Lamers, C.A. Bouwmans, A. van Straten, M.C. Donker, L. Hakkaart

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

303 Downloads (Pure)


Various preference-based measures of health are available for use as an outcome measure in cost–utility analysis.
The aim of this study is to compare two such measures EQ-5D and SF-6D in mental health patients.
Baseline data from a Dutch multi-centre randomised trial of 616 patients with mood and/or anxiety disorders were
used. Mean and median EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities were compared, both in the total sample and between severity
subgroups based on quartiles of SCL-90 scores. Utilities were expected to decline with increased severity.
Both EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities differed significantly between patients of adjacent severity groups. Mean utilities
increased from 0.51 at baseline to 0.68 at 1.5 years follow-up for EQ-5D and from 0.58 to 0.70 for SF-6D. For all
severity subgroups, the mean change in EQ-5D utilities as well as in SF-6D utilities was statistically significant.
Standardised response means were higher for SF-6D utilities.
We concluded that both EQ-5D and SF-6D discriminated between severity subgroups and captured
improvements in health over time. However, the use of EQ-5D resulted in larger health gains and consequent
lower cost–utility ratios, especially for the subgroup with the highest severity of mental health problems.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1229-1236
JournalHealth Economics
Issue number11
Publication statusPublished - 2006


Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities in mental health patients'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this