Mapping the SRS-22r questionnaire onto the EQ-5D-5L utility score in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

Abstract

This is a prospective study to establish prediction models that map the refined Scoliosis Research Society 22-item (SRS-22r) onto EuroQoL-5 dimension 5-level (EQ-5D-5L) utility scores in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients. Comparison of treatment outcomes in AIS can be determined by cost-utility analysis. However, the mainstay spine-specific health-related quality of life outcome measure, the SRS-22r questionnaire does not provide utility assessment. In this study, AIS patients were prospectively recruited to complete both the EQ-5D-5L and SRS-22r questionnaires by trained interviewers. Ordinary least squares regression was undertaken to develop mapping models, which the validity and robustness were assessed by using the 10-fold cross-validation procedure. EQ-5D-5L utility scores were regressed on demographics, Cobb angle, curve types, treatment modalities, and five domains of the SRS-22r questionnaire. Three models were developed using stepwise selection method. EQ-5D-5L scores were regressed on 1) main effects of SRS-22r subscale scores, 2) as per 1 plus squared and interaction terms, and 3) as per 2 plus demographic and clinical characteristics. Model goodness-of-fit was assessed using R-square, adjusted R-square, and information criteria; whereas the predictive performance was evaluated using root mean square error (RMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), and the proportion of absolute error within the threshold of 0.05 and 0.10. A total of 227 AIS patients with mean age of 15.6 years were recruited. The EQ-5D-5L scores were predicted by four domains of SRS-22r (main effects of ‘Function’, ‘Pain’, ‘Appearance’ and ‘Mental Health’, and squared term of ‘Function’ and ‘Pain’), and Cobb angle in Model 3 with the best goodness-of-fit (R-square/adjusted R-square: 62.1%/60.9%). Three models demonstrated an acceptance predictive performance in error analysis applying 10-fold cross-validation to three models where RMSE and MAE were between 0.063–0.065 and between 0.039–0.044, respectively. Model 3 was therefore recommended out of three mapping models established in this paper. To our knowledge, this is the first study to map a spine-specific health-related quality of life measure onto EQ-5D-5L for AIS patients. With the consideration and incorporation of demographic and clinical characteristics, over 60% variance explained by mapping model 3 enabled the satisfactory prediction of EQ-5D-5L utility scores from existing SRS-22r data for health economic appraisal of different treatment options.