What is the best approach to adopt for identifying the domains for a new measure of health, social care and carer-related quality of life to measure quality-adjusted life years? Application to the development of the EQ-HWB?

Tessa Peasgood (), Clara Mukuria, Jill Carlton, Janice Connell, Nancy Devlin (), Karen Jones, Rosemary Lovett, Bhash Naidoo, Stacey Rand, Juan Carlos Rejon-Parrilla, Donna Rowen, Aki Tsuchiya () and John Brazier
Additional contact information
Tessa Peasgood: University of Sheffield
Clara Mukuria: University of Sheffield
Jill Carlton: University of Sheffield
Janice Connell: University of Sheffield
Karen Jones: University of Kent
Rosemary Lovett: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)
Bhash Naidoo: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)
Stacey Rand: University of Kent
Juan Carlos Rejon-Parrilla: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)
Donna Rowen: University of Sheffield
John Brazier: University of Sheffield

The European Journal of Health Economics, 2021, vol. 22, issue 7, No 7, 1067-1081

Abstract: Abstract Economic evaluation combines costs and benefits to support decision-making when assessing new interventions using preference-based measures to measure and value benefits in health or health-related quality of life. These health-focused instruments have limited ability to capture wider impacts on informal carers or outcomes in other sectors such as social care. Sector-specific instruments can be used but this is problematic when the impact of an intervention straddles different sectors. An alternative approach is to develop a generic preference-based measure that is sufficiently broad to capture important cross-sector outcomes. We consider the options for the selection of domains for a cross-sector generic measure including how to identify domains, who should provide information on the domains and how this should be framed. Beyond domain identification, considerations of criteria and stakeholder needs are also identified. This paper sets out the case for an approach that relies on the voice of patients, social care users and informal carers as the main source of domains and describes how the approach was operationalised in the ‘Extending the QALY’ project which developed the new measure, the EQ-HWB (EQ health and wellbeing instrument). We conclude by discussing the strengths and limitations of this approach. The new measure should be sufficiently generic to be used to consistently evaluate health and social care interventions, yet also sensitive enough to pick up important changes in quality of life in patients, social care users and carers.

Keywords: QALY; Extending the QALY project; PROM; Measuring and valuing health; Domain selection; Social care; Carers (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-021-01306-z Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:22:y:2021:i:7:d:10.1007_s10198-021-01306-z

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... cs/journal/10198/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s10198-021-01306-z

Access Statistics for this article

The European Journal of Health Economics is currently edited by J.-M.G.v.d. Schulenburg

More articles in The European Journal of Health Economics from Springer, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().