Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: Implications for societal health care resource allocation

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 25, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 667-677

  King Jr , Joseph T ^a,b   Tsevat, Joel ^c,d   Lave, Judith R ^e,f   Roberts, Mark S ^f  

^a VA CONNECTICUT HEALTHCARE SYSTEM   (United States)

^b YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness analysis; Preferences; QALYs; Utility; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASTHMA; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; FACE MALFORMATION; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MENOPAUSE; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SKIN DISEASE; SOCIETY; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; FINANCING, PERSONAL; HEALTH CARE RATIONING; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS;

EID: 27944464408     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X05282640     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.
2. von Neumann J, Morgenstern O. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. New York: Wiley; 1953.
3. Torrance GW, Thomas WH, Sackett DL. A utility maximization model for evaluation of health care programs. Health Serv Res. 1972;7:118-33.
4. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales. A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. New York: Oxford University Press; 1989.
5. Johannesson M, Meltzer D. Some reflections on cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ. 1998;7(1):1-7.
6. Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, Tugwell PX. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. Can Med Assoc J. 1992;146(2):473-81.
7. Kaplan RM, Bush JW. Health-related quality of life measurement for evaluation research and policy analysis. Health Psychol. 1982;1(1):61-80.
8. Woolf SH, Henshall C. Health technology assessment in the United Kingdom. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2000;16:591-625.
9. Hirth RA, Chernew ME, Miller E, Fendrick AM, Weissert WG. Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: in search of a standard. Med Decis Making. 2000;20(3):332-42.
10. Diener A, O'Brien B, Gafni A. Health care contingent valuation studies: a review and classification of the literature. Health Econ. 1998;7(4):313-26.
11. King JT Jr, Tsevat J, Moossy JJ, Roberts MS. Preference-based quality of life measurement in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine. 2004;29:1271-80.
12. King JT Jr, Styn MA, Tsevat J, Roberts MS. "Perfect health" versus "disease free": the impact of anchor point choice on the measurement of preferences and the calculation of disease-specific disutilities. Med Decis Making. 2003;23(3):212-25.
13. King JT Jr, Tsevat J, Roberts MS. Preference-based quality of life in patients with cerebral aneurysms. Stroke. 2005;36(2):303-9.
14. Lenert LA, Sturley A, Watson ME. IMPACTS: internet-based development and administration of utility elicitation protocols. Med Decis Making. 2002;22(6):464-74.
15. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. A 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care: 1992;30:473-83.
16. Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-item short-form health survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34:220-33.
17. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales: A User's Manual. Boston (MA): Health Assessment Lab; 1994.
18. Arias E. United States Life Tables, 2000. National Vital Statistics Reports. 2002;51(3):7-8.
19. US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer Price Index-All Urban Consumers. Available at: http://data.bls.gov/ cgi-bin/surveymost. Accessed 5 May 2004.
20. DeNarvas-Walt C, Cleveland RW, Webster BH Jr. Income in the United States: 2002. Current Population Reports-Consumer Income. Washington (DC): US Census Bureau; 2003.
21. Ubel PA. What is the price of life and why doesn't it increase at the rate of inflation? Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:1637-41.
22. Fryback DG, Dasback EJ, Klein R, Klein BEK, Peterson K, Martin PA. The Beaver Dam health outcomes study: initial catalog of health-state quality factors. Med Decis Making. 1993;13:89-102.
23. Chang RW, Pellissier JM, Hazen GB. A cost-effectiveness analysis of total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis of the hip. JAMA. 1996;275(11):858-65.
24. Mark DB, Hlatky MA, Califf RM, et al. Cost effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy with tissue plasminogen activator as compared with streptokinase for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1995;332(21):1418-24.
25. Gafni A, Birch S. Inclusion of drugs in provincial drug benefit programs: Should "reasonable decisions" lead to uncontrolled growth in expenditures? Can Med Assoc J. 2003;168(7):849-51.
26. Zethraeus N. Willingness to pay for hormone replacement therapy. Health Econ. 1998;7(1):31-8.
27. Exchange rates lookup. Available at: http://www.x-rates.com/ cgi-bin/hlookup.cgi. Accessed 6 September 2002.
28. Cunningham SJ, Hunt NP. Relationship between utility values and willingness to pay in patients undergoing orthognathic treatment. Community Dent Health. 2000;17(2):92-6.
29. Lundberg L, Johannesson M, Silverdahl M, Hermansson C, Lindberg M. Quality of life, health-state utilities and willingness to pay in patients with psoriasis and atopic eczema. Br J Dermatol. 1999;141(6):1067-75.
30. Blumenschein K, Johannesson M. Relationship between quality of life instruments, health state utilities, and willingness to pay in patients with asthma. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1998;80(2):189-94.
31. Lloyd AJ. The extent of patients' understanding of the risk of treatments. Qual Health Care. 2001;10(Suppl 1):i14-8.
32. Kaplan RM, Sieber WJ, Ganiats TG. The quality of well-being scale: comparison of the interviewer-administered version with a self-administered questionnaire. Psychol Health. 1997;12:783-91.
33. Feeny D, Furlong W, Boyle M, Torrance GW. Multi-attribute health status classification systems: health utilities index. Pharmacoeconmics. 1995;7:490-502.
34. EuroQol-a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQol Group. Health Policy. 1990;16(3):199-208.
35. Sackett DL, Torrance GW. The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public. J Chronic Dis. 1978;31:697-704.
36. Boyd NF, Sutherland HJ, Heasman KZ, Tritchler DL, Cummings BJ. Whose utilities for decision analysis? Med Decis Making. 1990;10(58):67.
37. Najman J, Levine S. Evaluating the impact of medical care and technologies on the quality of life: a review and critique. Soc Sci Med. 1981;15F:105-15.
38. Epstein AM, Hall JA, Tognetti J, Son LH, Conant L. Using proxies to evaluate quality of life. Med Care. 1989;27:S91-8.
39. Sprangers MA, Schwartz CE. Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: a theoretical model. Soc Sci Med. 1999;48(11):1507-15.