E-Posters-10172

10172_Harvie

Pdf Summary

The study aimed to determine the responsiveness, validity, and minimally important difference (MID) of utility scores measured by the Short Form 6D (SF-6D) and EuroQol (EQ-5D) for women undergoing surgical repair for pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Data from four large US multicenter POP surgical trials were combined, and a subset of women completed the SF-6D (N=991), with some also completing the EQ-5D (N=666). Mean utility scores improved significantly from baseline to 12 months after surgery for both SF-6D (from 0.708±0.009 to 0.764±0.009) and EQ-5D (from 0.813±0.011 to 0.871±0.012). Effect size and standardized response mean for both measures were in the small to moderate range, indicating responsiveness to change. Both SF-6D and EQ-5D scores correlated with condition-specific quality of life measures, including Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ). The MID, estimated using anchor-based and distribution-based methods, was 0.028 for both SF-6D and EQ-5D. This study concluded that both SF-6D and EQ-5D are appropriate preference-based utility measures for women undergoing surgical treatment for POP, showing good validity properties. However, the scores are not directly comparable, as they measure different absolute amounts of health-related quality of life. The MIDs for SF-6D and EQ-5D are similar to those found for other medical conditions.

Keywords

responsiveness

validity

minimally important difference

utility scores

Short Form 6D

SF-6D

EuroQol

EQ-5D

pelvic organ prolapse

surgical repair