Abstract
Background The impact of COVID-19 goes beyond the acute phase of infection. It is imperative to evaluate health related quality of life (HRQoL) pre-COVID-19, but there is currently no evidence of the retrospective application of the EQ-5D-5L for COVID-19 studies.
Methods Subjects with ≥1 self-reported symptom and positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 at CVS Health US test sites were recruited between 01/31/2022-04/30/2022. On the day of enrollment which was around day 3 after testing positive, consented participants completed the EuroQol 5D-5L (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire twice : a modified version where all the questions were past tense to retrospectively assess pre-COVID-19 baseline QoL, and the standard version in present tense to assess current HRQoL. Duncan’s new multiple range test was adopted for post analysis of variance pairwise comparisons of EQ-VAS means between problem levels for each of 5 domains. A linear mixed model was applied to check whether the relationship between EQ visual analog scale (VAS) and utility index (UI) was consistent pre-COVID-19 and during COVID-19. Matching-adjusted indirect comparison was used to compare pre-COVID-19 UI and VAS scores with those of the US population. Cohen’s d was used to quantify the magnitude of difference in means between two groups.
Results Of 676 participants, 10.2% were age 65 or more years old, 73.2% female and 71.9% white. Diabetes was reported by 4.7% participants and hypertension by 11.2%. The pre-COVID-19 baseline mean UI was 0.924 and the mean VAS was 87.4. The estimated coefficient for the interaction of UI-by-retrospective collection indicator (0=standard prospective collection for Day 3 after COVID-19 testing, 1=retrospective for pre-COVID-19), -4.2 (SE: 3.2), P=0.197, indicates that retrospective collection does not significantly alter the relationship between EQ-VAS and UI. After adjusting for age, gender, diabetes, hypertension, and percent of mobility problems, predicted means of pre-COVID-19 baseline VAS and UI were 84.6 and 0.866, respectively. Both of these means were close to published US population norms (80.4 and 0.851) than those observed (87.4 and 0.924). After adjusting for age, gender, diabetes, and hypertension, 19.0% patients with COVID-19 had mobility problems, which was significantly lower than US population norm 25.2%, P<0.001. The calculated ES for UI and VAS were 0.15 and 0.39, respectively.
Conclusion At a group level the retrospectively collected pre-COVID-19 EQ-5D-5L is adequate and makes it possible to directly evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on HRQoL. Future studies are encouraged that are tailored to directly compare standard prospective assessment with retrospective assessment on the EQ-5D-5L during pre-COVID-19.
Competing Interest Statement
MDF, LP, JMZ and JCC are employees of Pfizer and may hold stock or stock options of Pfizer. XS and HC are employees of CVS Health and may hold stock of CVS health. YPT was employee of CVS Health when current study was conducted.
Funding Statement
This study was sponsored by Pfizer Inc.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the Sterling IRB, Protocol #C4591034. Participation in the study was voluntary and anonymous. Consent was obtained electronically via the CVS Health E-Consent platform. Participants were informed of their right to refuse or withdraw from the study at any time. Participants were compensated for their time.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Aggregated data that support the findings of this study are available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author XS, subject to review. These data are not publicly available due to them containing information that could compromise research participant privacy/consent.