Is the QALY blind, deaf and dumb to equity? NICE's considerations over equity

British Medical Bulletin

Volumn 101, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 17-31

  Soares, M O ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness; Equity; Fairness; Quality adjusted life year

Indexed keywords

COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HEALTH STATUS; LIFE EXPECTANCY; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; REVIEW;

DECISION MAKING; GOVERNMENT AGENCIES; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH CARE RATIONING; HEALTH STATUS DISPARITIES; HUMANS; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; STATE MEDICINE;

EID: 84858175784     PISSN: 00071420     EISSN: 14718391     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/bmb/lds003     Document Type: Review

References (38)

1. Department of Health. Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS, 2010. http://www.dh. gov.uk/prod-consum-dh/groups/dh-digitalassets/@dh/@en/@ps/ documents/digitalasset/dh- 117794.pdf. (8 February 2012, date last accessed).
2. Walker S, Palmer S, Sculpher M. The role of NICE technology appraisal in NHS rationing. Br Med Bull 2007;81-82:51-64. (Pubitemid 351194479)
3. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. London: NICE, 2008.
4. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Social Value Judgements, 2nd edn. Principles for the Development of NICE Guidance, 2008. http://www.nice.org.uk/media/C18/ 30/SVJ2PUBLICATION2008.pdf. (8 February 2012, date last accessed).
5. Whitehead SJ, Ali S. Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities. Br Med Bull 2010.
6. Pliskin JS, Shepard DS, Milton CW. Utility functions for life years and health status. Operations Research 1980;28:206-24.
7. Miyamoto JM, Wakker PP, Bleichrodt H et al. The zero-condition: a simplifying assumption in QALY measurement and multiattribute utility. Manag Sci 1998;44:839-49. (Pubitemid 128572654)
8. Bleichrodt H, Johannesson M. The validity of QALYs: an experimental test of constant proportional tradeoff and utility independence. Med Decis Making 1997;17:21-32. (Pubitemid 27020136)
9. Sugden R, Williams AH. The Principles of Practical Cost-Benefit Analysis. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1978.
10. Birch S, Gafni A. Cost effectiveness/utility analyses. Do current decision rules lead us to where we want to be? J Health Econ 1992;11:279-96.
11. Sassi F, Archard L, Le Grand J. Equity and the economic evaluation of healthcare. Health Technol Assess 2001;5:1-138.
12. Loomes G, McKenzie L. The use of QALYs in health care decision making. Soc Sci Med 1989;28:299-308. (Pubitemid 19053139)
13. Dolan P. The measurement of individual utility and social welfare. J Health Econ 1998;17:39-52. (Pubitemid 28042037)
14. Whitehead M. The concepts and principles of equity and health. Int J Health Serv 1992;22:429-45. (Pubitemid 23364255)
15. Culyer AJ, Wagstaff A. Equity and equality in health and health care. J Health Econ 1993;12:431-57. (Pubitemid 24037069)
16. Dolan P, Shaw R, Tsuchiya A et al. QALY maximisation and people's preferences: a methodological review of the literature. Health Econ 2005;14:197-208. (Pubitemid 40253634)
17. Nord E, Daniels N, Kamlet M. QALYs: some challenges. Value Health 2009;12 (Suppl. 1):S10-5.
18. Ubel PA, Spranca MD, Dekay ML et al. Public preferences for prevention versus cure: what if an ounce of prevention is worth only an ounce of cure? Med Decis Making 1998;18:141-8. (Pubitemid 28169583)
19. McKie J, Richardson J. The rule of rescue. Soc Sci Med 2003;56:2407-19. (Pubitemid 36555359)
20. Williams A. Intergenerational equity: an exploration of the 'fair innings' argument. Health Econ 1997;6:117-32. (Pubitemid 27199138)
21. Nord E. The relevance of health state after treatment in prioritising between different patients. J Med Ethics 1993;19:37-42. (Pubitemid 23092931)
22. Tsuchiya A. Age-related preferences and age weighting health benefits. Soc Sci Med 1999;48:267-76. (Pubitemid 29017835)
23. Le Grand J. Equity, health, and health care. Soc Justice Res 1987;1:257-74.
24. Harris J. Unprincipled QALYs: a response to Cubbon. J Med Ethics 1991;17:185-8.
25. Harris J. QALYfying the value of life. J Med Ethics 1987;13:117-23.
26. Kappel K, Sandoe P. QALYs, age and fairness. Bioethics 1992;6:297-316.
27. Bleichrodt H. Health utility indices and equity considerations. J Health Econ 1997;16:65-91. (Pubitemid 27224094)
28. Williams AH, Cookson RA. Equity-efficiency trade-offs in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2006;22:1-9. (Pubitemid 43376233)
29. Weinstein MC. A QALY is a QALY is a QALY - or is it? J Health Econ 1988;7:289-90.
30. Rawlins MD, Culyer AJ. National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments. BMJ 2004;329:224-7. (Pubitemid 39013284)
31. Dolan P, Tsuchiya A. The elicitation of distributional judgements in the context of economic evaluation. In: Jones AM (ed.). The Elgar Companion to Health Economics, Vol. xvii. Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, 2006,565.
32. Wailoo A, Tsuchiya A, McCabe C. Weighting must wait: incorporating equity concerns into cost-effectiveness analysis may take longer than expected. Pharmacoeconomics 2009;27:983-9.
33. Baltussen R, Niessen L. Priority setting of health interventions: the need for multi-criteria decision analysis. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 2006;4:14.
34. Cookson R, Drummond M, Weatherly H. Explicit incorporation of equity considerations into economic evaluation of public health interventions. Health Econ Policy Law 2009;4(Pt 2):231-45.
35. Nord E, Pinto JL, Richardson J et al. Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes. Health Econ 1999;8:25-39. (Pubitemid 29057353)
36. Cookson R, McCabe C, Tsuchiya A. Public healthcare resource allocation and the rule of rescue. J Med Ethics 2008;34:540-4.
37. Hadorn DC. Setting health care priorities in Oregon. Cost-effectiveness meets the rule of rescue. JAMA 1991;265:2218-25.
38. Trowman R, Chung H, Longson C et al. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and its role in assessing the value of new cancer treatments in England and Wales. Clin Cancer Res 2011;17:4930-5.