Benefits beyond health in the willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life-year.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS European Journal of Health Economics Pub Date : 2024-10-07 DOI:10.1007/s10198-024-01726-7
Linda M de Vries, Werner B F Brouwer, Pieter H M van Baal
{"title":"Benefits beyond health in the willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life-year.","authors":"Linda M de Vries, Werner B F Brouwer, Pieter H M van Baal","doi":"10.1007/s10198-024-01726-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Adopting a societal perspective in cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) requires including all societal costs and benefits even if they fall outside of the realm of health and healthcare. While some benefits are not explicitly included, they might be implicitly included when people value quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) in monetary terms. An example is utility of consumption (UoC) which has played a crucial role in discussions regarding the welfare economic underpinnings of CEA. This study investigates whether people consider elements beyond health when valuing QALYs monetarily and the influence of inclusion on this value. A Willingness to Pay (WTP) experiment was administered among the general public in which people were asked to assign monetary values to QALYs. Our results show that (stated) UoC increases with quality of life but that instructing people to consider UoC does not impact their monetary valuation of the QALY. Furthermore, many respondents consider elements beyond health when valuing QALYs but the impact on the monetary value of a QALY is limited. These findings suggest that these elements are currently not (adequately) captured in CEA. Findings also illustrate that it is difficult to isolate health from non-health benefits and to consistently capture these in CEA. With that, reconciling CEA with welfare economics remains challenging.</p>","PeriodicalId":51416,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Health Economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-024-01726-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Adopting a societal perspective in cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) requires including all societal costs and benefits even if they fall outside of the realm of health and healthcare. While some benefits are not explicitly included, they might be implicitly included when people value quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) in monetary terms. An example is utility of consumption (UoC) which has played a crucial role in discussions regarding the welfare economic underpinnings of CEA. This study investigates whether people consider elements beyond health when valuing QALYs monetarily and the influence of inclusion on this value. A Willingness to Pay (WTP) experiment was administered among the general public in which people were asked to assign monetary values to QALYs. Our results show that (stated) UoC increases with quality of life but that instructing people to consider UoC does not impact their monetary valuation of the QALY. Furthermore, many respondents consider elements beyond health when valuing QALYs but the impact on the monetary value of a QALY is limited. These findings suggest that these elements are currently not (adequately) captured in CEA. Findings also illustrate that it is difficult to isolate health from non-health benefits and to consistently capture these in CEA. With that, reconciling CEA with welfare economics remains challenging.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在质量调整生命年的支付意愿中,健康以外的益处。
在成本效益分析(CEA)中采用社会视角,需要将所有社会成本和效益纳入其中,即使这些成本和效益不属于健康和医疗保健领域。虽然有些效益没有明确包括在内,但当人们以货币形式对质量调整生命年(QALYs)进行估价时,这些效益可能会被隐含地包括在内。消费效用(UoC)就是一个例子,它在有关 CEA 的福利经济基础的讨论中发挥了至关重要的作用。本研究调查了人们在对 QALYs 进行货币估值时,是否考虑了健康以外的因素,以及包容性对这一估值的影响。我们在公众中进行了一项支付意愿(WTP)实验,要求人们为 QALYs 赋予货币价值。我们的结果表明,(声明的)UoC 会随着生活质量的提高而增加,但让人们考虑 UoC 并不会影响他们对 QALY 的货币估值。此外,许多受访者在评估 QALY 时会考虑健康以外的因素,但对 QALY 货币价值的影响有限。这些调查结果表明,目前的 CEA 并没有(充分)考虑这些因素。研究结果还表明,很难将健康效益与非健康效益区分开来,也很难在 CEA 中持续反映这些效益。因此,将成本效益分析与福利经济学相协调仍具有挑战性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.30%
发文量
131
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Health Economics is a journal of Health Economics and associated disciplines. The growing demand for health economics and the introduction of new guidelines in various European countries were the motivation to generate a highly scientific and at the same time practice oriented journal considering the requirements of various health care systems in Europe. The international scientific board of opinion leaders guarantees high-quality, peer-reviewed publications as well as articles for pragmatic approaches in the field of health economics. We intend to cover all aspects of health economics: • Basics of health economic approaches and methods • Pharmacoeconomics • Health Care Systems • Pricing and Reimbursement Systems • Quality-of-Life-Studies The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The author will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill the above-mentioned requirements. Officially cited as: Eur J Health Econ
期刊最新文献
Psychometric performance of EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 in patients with lymphoma in China. What remains after the money ends? Evidence on whether admission reductions continued following the largest health and social care integration programme in England. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and SF-6Dv2 in patients with late-onset Pompe disease. The causal effect of early retirement on medication use across sex and occupation: evidence from Danish administrative data. Cost awareness among intensivists in their daily clinical practice: a prospective multicentre study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1