护理人员和普通人群对依赖性相关健康状况的偏好比较

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Pub Date : 2024-09-10 DOI:10.1007/s40258-024-00908-x
Eva Rodríguez-Míguez, Antonio Sampayo
{"title":"护理人员和普通人群对依赖性相关健康状况的偏好比较","authors":"Eva Rodríguez-Míguez, Antonio Sampayo","doi":"10.1007/s40258-024-00908-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Objective</h3><p>We assess whether the preferences regarding dependency-related health states as stated by informal caregivers are aligned with those expressed by the general population.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>The preferences of a sample of 139 Spanish informal caregivers of dependent patients are compared with those obtained via a sample of 312 persons, also from the Spanish general population. We assess 24 dependency states extracted from the DEP-6D using the time trade-off method. Descriptive statistics and regression methods are used to explore differences between the two samples.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>Mean difference tests establish that, for all but one of the 24 states, there are no significant differences between the samples. The estimated mean values ranged from − 0.64 to 0.60 for the caregiver sample and from − 0.60 to 0.65 for the general population sample, with a correlation of 0.96. On average, the classification of states as better or worse than dead matched in both samples (except for one state). Regression models also show that sample type does not have a significant average impact. After we introduce interaction effects, only the most severe level of two dimensions, cognitive problems and housework, result in significant differences—with the caregiver sample reporting higher values for the former, and lower values for the latter.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>Caregivers and the general population exhibit quite similar preferences concerning dependency-related health states. This suggests that the results of cost-utility analyses, and the resource allocation decisions based on them, would likewise not be significantly affected by the preferences used to generate the weighting algorithm.</p>","PeriodicalId":8065,"journal":{"name":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","volume":"166 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Caregiver and General Population Preferences for Dependency-Related Health States\",\"authors\":\"Eva Rodríguez-Míguez, Antonio Sampayo\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40258-024-00908-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Objective</h3><p>We assess whether the preferences regarding dependency-related health states as stated by informal caregivers are aligned with those expressed by the general population.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Methods</h3><p>The preferences of a sample of 139 Spanish informal caregivers of dependent patients are compared with those obtained via a sample of 312 persons, also from the Spanish general population. We assess 24 dependency states extracted from the DEP-6D using the time trade-off method. Descriptive statistics and regression methods are used to explore differences between the two samples.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Results</h3><p>Mean difference tests establish that, for all but one of the 24 states, there are no significant differences between the samples. The estimated mean values ranged from − 0.64 to 0.60 for the caregiver sample and from − 0.60 to 0.65 for the general population sample, with a correlation of 0.96. On average, the classification of states as better or worse than dead matched in both samples (except for one state). Regression models also show that sample type does not have a significant average impact. After we introduce interaction effects, only the most severe level of two dimensions, cognitive problems and housework, result in significant differences—with the caregiver sample reporting higher values for the former, and lower values for the latter.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Conclusion</h3><p>Caregivers and the general population exhibit quite similar preferences concerning dependency-related health states. This suggests that the results of cost-utility analyses, and the resource allocation decisions based on them, would likewise not be significantly affected by the preferences used to generate the weighting algorithm.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8065,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy\",\"volume\":\"166 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-024-00908-x\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-024-00908-x","RegionNum":4,"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

摘要

方法将西班牙 139 名依赖他人生活的患者的非正式护理人员的偏好与同样来自西班牙普通人群的 312 人的偏好进行比较。我们使用时间权衡法评估了从 DEP-6D 中提取的 24 种依赖状态。结果均值差异检验表明,在 24 种状态中,除一种状态外,其他状态在样本间均无显著差异。护理人员样本的估计平均值在 - 0.64 到 0.60 之间,普通人群样本的估计平均值在 - 0.60 到 0.65 之间,相关系数为 0.96。平均而言,两个样本(除一个州外)对 "好于或差于死亡 "状态的分类是一致的。回归模型还显示,样本类型对平均影响不大。在我们引入交互效应后,只有认知问题和家务劳动这两个维度的最严重程度导致了显著差异--照顾者样本报告了前者的较高值,而后者的较低值。这表明,成本效用分析的结果以及在此基础上做出的资源分配决策同样不会受到用于生成加权算法的偏好的显著影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Comparison of Caregiver and General Population Preferences for Dependency-Related Health States

Objective

We assess whether the preferences regarding dependency-related health states as stated by informal caregivers are aligned with those expressed by the general population.

Methods

The preferences of a sample of 139 Spanish informal caregivers of dependent patients are compared with those obtained via a sample of 312 persons, also from the Spanish general population. We assess 24 dependency states extracted from the DEP-6D using the time trade-off method. Descriptive statistics and regression methods are used to explore differences between the two samples.

Results

Mean difference tests establish that, for all but one of the 24 states, there are no significant differences between the samples. The estimated mean values ranged from − 0.64 to 0.60 for the caregiver sample and from − 0.60 to 0.65 for the general population sample, with a correlation of 0.96. On average, the classification of states as better or worse than dead matched in both samples (except for one state). Regression models also show that sample type does not have a significant average impact. After we introduce interaction effects, only the most severe level of two dimensions, cognitive problems and housework, result in significant differences—with the caregiver sample reporting higher values for the former, and lower values for the latter.

Conclusion

Caregivers and the general population exhibit quite similar preferences concerning dependency-related health states. This suggests that the results of cost-utility analyses, and the resource allocation decisions based on them, would likewise not be significantly affected by the preferences used to generate the weighting algorithm.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy provides timely publication of cutting-edge research and expert opinion from this increasingly important field, making it a vital resource for payers, providers and researchers alike. The journal includes high quality economic research and reviews of all aspects of healthcare from various perspectives and countries, designed to communicate the latest applied information in health economics and health policy. While emphasis is placed on information with practical applications, a strong basis of underlying scientific rigor is maintained.
期刊最新文献
Cost-Effective and Sustainable Drug Use in Hospitals: A Systematic and Practice-Based Approach. Quality-Adjusted Life Expectancy Norms Based on the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 for China. Value is Gendered: The Need for Sex and Gender Considerations in Health Economic Evaluations. Assessing the Direct Impact of Death on Discrete Choice Experiment Utilities. Acknowledgement to Referees.
×
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