Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes
Corresponding Author
Erik Nord
National Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
National Institute of Public Health, P.O. Box 4404 Torshov, N-0403 Oslo, Norway===Search for more papers by this authorJose Luis Pinto
Department of Economics, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
Search for more papers by this authorJeff Richardson
Centre for Health Program Evaluation, Melbourne, Australia
Search for more papers by this authorPaul Menzel
Department of Philosophy, Pacific Lutheran University, Tacoma, Washington, USA
Search for more papers by this authorPeter Ubel
Center for Bioethics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Erik Nord
National Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
National Institute of Public Health, P.O. Box 4404 Torshov, N-0403 Oslo, Norway===Search for more papers by this authorJose Luis Pinto
Department of Economics, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
Search for more papers by this authorJeff Richardson
Centre for Health Program Evaluation, Melbourne, Australia
Search for more papers by this authorPaul Menzel
Department of Philosophy, Pacific Lutheran University, Tacoma, Washington, USA
Search for more papers by this authorPeter Ubel
Center for Bioethics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
The paper addresses some limitations of the QALY approach and outlines a valuation procedure that may overcome these limitations. In particular, we focus on the following issues: the distinction between assessing individual utility and assessing societal value of health care; the need to incorporate concerns for severity of illness as an independent factor in a numerical model of societal valuations of health outcomes; similarly, the need to incorporate reluctance to discriminate against patients that happen to have lesser potentials for health than others; and finally, the need to combine measurements of health-related quality of life obtained from actual patients (or former patients) with measurements of distributive preferences in the general population when estimating societal value. We show how equity weights may serve to incorporate concerns for severity and potentials for health in QALY calculations. We also suggest that for chronically ill or disabled people a life year gained should count as one and no less than one as long as the year is considered preferable to being dead by the person concerned. We call our approach ‘cost-value analysis’. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
References
- 1Weinstein, M.C. and Stason, W.B. Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health analysis and medical practices. New England Journal of Medicine 1977; 296: 716–721.
- 2Williams, A. Welfare economics and health status measurement. In: J. van der Gaag and M. Perlman (eds.) Health, economics and health economics. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1981.
- 3Broome, J. Goodness, fairness and QALYs. In: J.M. Bell and S. Mendus (eds.) Philosophy and medical welfare. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
- 4Lockwood, M. Quality of life and resource allocation. In: J.M. Bell and S. Mendus (eds.) Philosophy and medical welfare. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
- 5Nord, E. The significance of contextual factors in valuing health states. Health Policy 1989; 13: 189–198.
- 6Menzel, P. Medical costs, moral choices. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983.
- 7Mooney, G., Olsen, J.A. QALYs: where next?. In: A. McGuire (ed) (eds.) et al. , roviding health care: the economics of alternative systems of finance and delivery. London: Oxford University Press, 1991.
- 8Richardson, J. Cost-utility analysis: what should be measured?. Social Science and Medicine 1994; 39: 7–21.
- 9Williams, A. Ethics and efficiency in the provision of health care. In: J.M. Bell and S. Mendus (eds.) Philosophy and medical welfare. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
- 10Culyer, A.J. The normative economics of health care finance and provision. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 1989; 5: 34–58.
10.1093/oxrep/5.1.34 Google Scholar
- 11Broome, J. Weighing goods. Oxford: Blackwell, 1991.
- 12Williams, A. Economics, QALYs and medical ethics. Discussion Paper No. 121. York: Centre for Health Economics, University of York, 1994.
- 13Williams, A. QALYs and ethics: a health economist&'s perspective. Social Science and Medicine 1996; 43: 1795–1804.
- 14Wagstaff, A. QALYs and the equity–efficiency trade-off. Journal of Health Economics 1991; 10: 21–41.
- 15Dolan, P. The allocation of benefits in health care: Does equity matter? Paper for the First World Conference of the International Health Economics Association, Vancouver, May 1996.
- 16Williams, A. Intergenerational equity: an exploration of the ‘fair innings’ argument. Health Economics 1997; 6: 117–132.
10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199703)6:2<117::AID-HEC256>3.0.CO;2-B CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
- 17Harris, J. The value of life. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1985.
- 18Mehrez, A. and Gafni, A. Quality-adjusted life years, utility theory and healthy year equivalents. Medical Decision Making 1989; 9: 142–149.
- 19Rawls, J. A theory of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971.
10.4159/9780674042605 Google Scholar
- 20Callahan, D. Setting mental health priorities: problems and possibilities. The Milbank Quarterly 1994; 72: 451–470.
- 21Brock, D. Ethical issues in recipient selection for organ transplantation. In: D. Mathieu (ed) (eds.) Organ substitution technology: ethical, legal and public policy issues. Boulder: Westview, 1988.
- 22Kamm, F. The report of the US Task Force on Organ Transplantation: criticisms and alternatives. Mount Sinae Journal of Medicine 1989; 56: 207–220.
- 23Menzel, P. Strong medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.
- 24Daniels, N. Just health care. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985.
10.1017/CBO9780511624971 Google Scholar
- 25Harris, J. QALYfying the value of life. Journal of Medical Ethics 1987; 13: 117–123.
- 26Williams, A. Response: QALYfying the value of life. Journal of Medical Ethics 1987; 13: 123.
- 27Patrick, D., Bush, J. and Chen, M. Methods for measuring levels of well-being for a health status index. Health Services Research 1973; 8: 228–245.
- 28Nord, E. The person trade-off approach to valuing health care programs. Medical Decision Making 1995; 15: 201–208.
- 29Rosser, R. and Kind, P. A scale of valuations of states of illness: is there a social consensus?. International Journal of Epidemiology 1978; 7: 347–358.
- 30Nord, E., Richardson, J. and Macarounas-Kirchmann, K. Social evaluation of health care versus personal evaluation of health states: evidence on the validity of four health state scaling instruments using Norwegian and Australian surveys. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 1993; 9: 463–478.
- 31Nord, E. Health status index models for use in resource allocation decisions. A critical review in the light of observed preferences for social choice. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 1996; 12: 31–44.
- 32Ubel, P.A., Loewenstein, G., Scanlon, D. and Kamlet, M. Individual utilities are inconsistent with rationing choices. Medical Decision Making 1996; 16: 108–116.
- 33Pinto, J.L. Is the person trade-off a valid method for allocating health care resources. Health Economics 1997; 6: 71–81.
- 34Richardson, J. Critique and some recent contributions to the theory of cost utility analysis. Working Paper No. 77/ 1997. Melbourne: Centre for Health Program Evaluation, 1997.
- 35Dolan, P. The measurement of individual utility and social welfare. Journal of Health Economics 1998; 17: 39–52.
- 36Nord, E. Helsepolitikere ønsker ikke mest mulig helse per krone. (Health politicians do not wish to maximize health benefits. Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association 1993; 113: 1171–1173.
- 37Nord, E. The trade-off between severity of illness and treatment effect in cost-value analysis of health care. Health Policy 1993; 24: 227–238.
- 38Nord, E. The relevance of health state after treatment in prioritising between patients. Journal of Medical Ethics 1993; 19: 37–42.
- 39Nord, E., Richardson, J., Street, A., Singer, P. and Kuhse, H. Maximising health benefits versus egalitarianism: an Australian survey of health issues. Social Science and Medicine 1995; 41: 1429–1437.
- 40Pinto JL, Perpinan JMA, Health state after treatment: a reason for discrimination? (Submitted to Health Economics)
- 41Dolan, P. and Cookson, R. Measuring preferences over the distribution of health benefits. Mimeo. University of York: Centre for Health Economics, 1998.
- 42Nord, E. An alternative to QALYs: The Saved Young Life Equivalent (SAVE). British Medical Journal 1992; 305: 875–877.
- 43Nord, E. A table of values for cost-effectiveness analysis in health care. Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association 1996; 27: 3246–3249 (text in Norwegian).
- 44Sintonen, H. An approach to measuring and valuing health states. Social Science and Medicine 1981; 15c: 55–65.
- 45Murray, C. and Lopez, A. The Global Burden of Disease. New York: WHO/Harvard University Press, 1996.
- 46Eddy, D. Oregon&'s methods: did cost-effectiveness analysis fail?. Journal of the American Medical Association 1991; 266: 2135–2141.
- 47Nord, E. Unjustified use of the Quality of Well-being Scale in Oregon. Health Policy 1993; 24: 45–53.
- 48Pinto, J.L. The Oregon experience: scales, numbers and their meaning. Paper for the 14th Spanish Meeting of Health Economics. Santiago de Compostela, June 1994.
- 49Hadorn, D. Setting health care priorities in Oregon. Journal of the American Medical Association 1991; 265: 2218–2225.
- 50Dolan, P. Aggregating health state valuations: A reply to Erik Nord&'s comment. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy 1997; 2: 203–204.
- 51Gold, M.R., Siegel, J.E., Russell, L.B. and Weinstein, M.C. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
- 52Richardson, J. and Nord, E. The importance of perspective in the measurement of quality adjusted life years. Medical Decision Making 1997; 17: 33–41.
- 53Van der Maas, P.J. Disability weights for diseases in Europe. Project Program. Mimeo. Rotterdam: Erasmus University, 1997.
- 54O&'Leary, J.F., Fairclough, D.L., Jankowski, M.K. and Weeks, J.C. Comparison of time trade-off utilities and rating scale values of cancer patients and their relatives. Medical Decision Making 1995; 15: 132–137.
- 55Fowler, F.J., Cleary, P.D., Massagli, M.P., Weissman, J. and Epstein, A. The role of reluctance to give up life in the measurement of the value of health states. Medical Decision Making 1995; 15: 195–200.
- 56Mulkay, M., Ashmore, M. and Pinch, T. Measuring the quality of life: a sociological invention concerning the application of economics to health care. Sociology 1987; 21: 541–564.
- 57Klein, R. The role of health economics. British Medical Journal 1989; 299: 275–276.