Peasgood, Tessa, Makuria, Clara, Carlton, Jill, Connell, Janice, Devlin, Nancy, Jones, Karen C., Lovett, Rosemary, Naidoo, Bhash, Rand, Stacey, Rejon-Parrilla, Juan Carlos, and others. (2021) 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. European Journal of Health Economics, . pp. 1-15. ISSN 1618-7598. (doi:10.1007/s10198-021-01306-z) (KAR id:87816)
PDF
Publisher pdf
Language: English
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
|
|
Download this file (PDF/521kB) |
Preview |
Request a format suitable for use with assistive technology e.g. a screenreader | |
Official URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-021-01306-z |
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.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
DOI/Identification number: | 10.1007/s10198-021-01306-z |
Uncontrolled keywords: | Extending the QALY project, PROM, Measuring and valuing health, Domain selection, Social care, Carers |
Divisions: | Divisions > Division for the Study of Law, Society and Social Justice > School of Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research > Personal Social Services Research Unit |
Depositing User: | Stacey Rand |
Date Deposited: | 29 Apr 2021 08:23 UTC |
Last Modified: | 15 Nov 2022 12:27 UTC |
Resource URI: | https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/87816 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes) |
- Link to SensusAccess
- Export to:
- RefWorks
- EPrints3 XML
- BibTeX
- CSV
- Depositors only (login required):