Objective: To pilot research of potential differences between Māori and non-Māori in their health state preferences and to investigate the adequacy of a standard valuation instrument’s — the EQ-5D’s — representation of ‘health’.
Methods: Health state valuations and perceptions of the EQ-5D’s adequacy were collected in 2000 via a self-completed but interviewer-assisted questionnaire from 66 Māori in New Zealand accessed through cultural networks; five participants also undertook in-depth post-questionnaire interviews. Their valuations and perceptions were compared with non-Māori and Māori respectively from an earlier survey that used an electoral roll sampling frame.
Results: The valuations were not statistically different to valuations from the non-Māori and Māori electoral roll samples, although the majority of respondents failed to score the health ‘state’ dead. Participants exhibited more pairwise inconsistencies than their electoral roll counterparts and most considered the EQ-5D’s representation of ‘health’ to be adequate, although other aspects not included in the instrument were also important.
Conclusions: The hypothesis of differences between Māori and non-Māori in their health state preferences is not supported. Nor is there evidence that the EQ-5D fails to capture what Māori perceive as ‘health’ any more than it does for non-Māori, although the high prevalence of missing values for dead is worrisome.
Implications: These tentative findings suggest no fundamental rationale for differentiating between Māori and non-Māori when using the EQ-5D to represent (generic) health outcomes or to value them for economic evaluations.
