scholarly journals PHP158 Determining the Monetary Value of a Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY): Systematic Review of the Evidence

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. A362
Author(s):  
M. Iskedjian ◽  
J. Lelorier ◽  
A. Gafni ◽  
V. Navarro
PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. e0122760 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khachapon Nimdet ◽  
Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk ◽  
Kittaya Vichansavakul ◽  
Surachat Ngorsuraches

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ziping Ye ◽  
Fuyao Liu ◽  
Jia Ma ◽  
Ziyang Zhou ◽  
Chen Wang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The payment card (PC) format and the open-ended (OE) format are common methods in eliciting willingness-to-pay (WTP) of one additional quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The aim of this research is to compare these two formats in eliciting the monetary value of a QALY. Methods A contingent valuation survey was carried out using a pre-designed questionnaire with various hypothetical scenarios. The difference between the PC and the OE formats was evaluated by a two-sample equality test. Furthermore, generalized linear models were carried out to control observed heterogeneity and to test theoretical validity. Results In total, 461 individuals were involved, among whom 235 (51%) answered the PC question, while 226 (49%) answered the OE question. Excluding zero response, the mean WTP values of these two formats for different scenarios varied dramatically, which was from 13,278 to 280,177 RMB for the PC, 18,119 to 620,913 RMB for the OE. The OE format tended to elicit lower values for less serious condition and higher values for more serious condition. However, equality test of mean and median demonstrated insignificant difference of these two formats for all scenarios. For both OE and PC format, most variables were found to have significant effect on the value of WTP/QALY. Moreover, joint estimation indicated a statistically significant positive effect on the OE results. Further analysis demonstrated that the imbalanced zero response distribution caused the main difference of these two formats. Conclusions This research indicated insignificantly different WTP/QALY estimates of the PC format and OE format with the grouped data whereas significantly higher estimates of the OE format from the pooled data. These two formats were found to be valid. More research about the difference and the validity of various WTP eliciting methods would be recommended for a robust estimation of WTP/QALY.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ziping Ye ◽  
Fuyao Liu ◽  
Jia Ma ◽  
Ziyang Zhou ◽  
Chen Wang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: The payment card (PC) format and the open-ended (OE) format are common methods in eliciting willing-to-pay (WTP) of one additional quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The aim of this research is to compare these two formats in eliciting the monetary value of a QALY.Methods: A contingent valuation survey was carried out using a pre-designed questionnaire with various hypothetical scenarios. The difference between the PC and the OE formats was evaluated by a two-sample equality test. Furthermore, regression analysis was carried out to control observed heterogeneity and to test theoretical validity.Results: In total, 461 individuals were involved, among whom 235 (51%) answered the PC question, while 226 (49%) answered the OE question. Excluding zero response and 1% top values, the mean WTP values of these two formats vary dramatically, which is 93,424 RMB (SD 117,601) for the PC, 143,347 RMB (SD 209,821) for the OE. Subgroup analysis indicated that the OE format tended to elicit lower values for less serious condition and higher values for more serious condition. Both formats were proved to be theoretically valid, whereas the OE technique was found to have a stronger association with most variables in the regression model than that of the PC format. Moreover, joint estimation indicated a significantly positive effect on the OE results.Conclusions: This research indicated that the PC format and OE format elicited different monetary value of a QALY, but both formats were proved to be theoretically valid. More research about the difference and the validity of various WTP eliciting methods would be recommendedfor a robust estimation of WTP/QALY.


2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (29) ◽  
pp. 1-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Davis ◽  
Emma Simpson ◽  
Jean Hamilton ◽  
Marrissa Martyn-St James ◽  
Andrew Rawdin ◽  
...  

Background Fragility fractures are fractures that result from mechanical forces that would not ordinarily result in fracture. Objectives The objectives were to evaluate the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of non-bisphosphonates {denosumab [Prolia®; Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA], raloxifene [Evista®; Daiichi Sankyo Company, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan], romosozumab [Evenity®; Union Chimique Belge (UCB) S.A. (Brussels, Belgium) and Amgen Inc.] and teriparatide [Forsteo®; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA]}, compared with each other, bisphosphonates or no treatment, for the prevention of fragility fracture. Data sources For the clinical effectiveness review, nine electronic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) were searched up to July 2018. Review methods A systematic review and network meta-analysis of fracture and femoral neck bone mineral density were conducted. A review of published economic analyses was undertaken and a model previously used to evaluate bisphosphonates was adapted. Discrete event simulation was used to estimate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years for a simulated cohort of patients with heterogeneous characteristics. This was done for each non-bisphosphonate treatment, a strategy of no treatment, and the five bisphosphonate treatments previously evaluated. The model was populated with effectiveness evidence from the systematic review and network meta-analysis. All other parameters were estimated from published sources. An NHS and Personal Social Services perspective was taken, and costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Fracture risk was estimated from patient characteristics using the QFracture® (QFracture-2012 open source revision 38, Clinrisk Ltd, Leeds, UK) and FRAX® (web version 3.9, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK) tools. The relationship between fracture risk and incremental net monetary benefit was estimated using non-parametric regression. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses were used to assess uncertainty. Results Fifty-two randomised controlled trials of non-bisphosphonates were included in the clinical effectiveness systematic review and an additional 51 randomised controlled trials of bisphosphonates were included in the network meta-analysis. All treatments had beneficial effects compared with placebo for vertebral, non-vertebral and hip fractures, with hazard ratios varying from 0.23 to 0.94, depending on treatment and fracture type. The effects on vertebral fractures and the percentage change in bone mineral density were statistically significant for all treatments. The rate of serious adverse events varied across trials (0–33%), with most between-group differences not being statistically significant for comparisons with placebo/no active treatment, non-bisphosphonates or bisphosphonates. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were > £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year for all non-bisphosphonate interventions compared with no treatment across the range of QFracture and FRAX scores expected in the population eligible for fracture risk assessment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for denosumab may fall below £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year at very high levels of risk or for high-risk patients with specific characteristics. Raloxifene was dominated by no treatment (resulted in fewer quality-adjusted life-years) in most risk categories. Limitations The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are uncertain for very high-risk patients. Conclusions Non-bisphosphonates are effective in preventing fragility fractures, but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are generally greater than the commonly applied threshold of £20,000–30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018107651. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 29. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ziping Ye ◽  
Fuyao Liu ◽  
Jia Ma ◽  
Ziyang Zhou ◽  
Chen Wang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: The payment card (PC) format and the open-ended (OE) format are common methods in eliciting willing-to-pay (WTP) of one additional quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The aim of this research is to compare these two formats in eliciting the monetary value of a QALY.Methods: A contingent valuation survey was carried out using a pre-designed questionnaire with various hypothetical scenarios. The difference between the PC and the OE formats was evaluated by a two-sample equality test. Furthermore, regression analysis was carried out to control observed heterogeneity and to test theoretical validity.Results: In total, 461 individuals were involved, among whom 235 (51%) answered the PC question, while 226 (49%) answered the OE question. No significant difference was observed between the median of these two methods. However, in the subgroup analysis, noteworthy differences were noticed in the median for these two formats in all scenarios. Both formats were proved to be theoretically valid, whereas the OE technique was found to have a stronger association with all variables in the regression model than that of the PC format. Moreover, joint estimation indicated a positive but not significant effect on the OE results.Conclusions: This research indicated that there was no statistical difference between the PC format and OE format and proved the validity of both, which justified the combined use of these two methods in eliciting monetary value of QALY. More research about the difference and the validity of various WTP eliciting methods would be needed for a robust estimation of WTP/QALY.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document