Big Q and Little Q revisited Christopher McCabe PhD Capital Health Endowed Research Chair in Emergency Medicine Research.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Comparing different treatments How can we decide?.

Advertisements

Measuring outcomes Emma Frew October Measuring outcomes Learning objectives By the end of the session students should be able to – Explain how different.

Economic evaluations alongside clinical trials: what they contribute, how they are performed and their limitations Dr. Stavros Petrou Presentation to Nottingham.

Quality of life in relation to costs

1 Could there be a single European EQ tariff? Jan J.V. Busschbach, Ph.D. Former address: –iMTA, Erasmus university Present address: –Medical Psychology.

Richard Katesmark Registered Osteopath (special interest; Headaches and Migraines)

COCOM Kwaliteit van leven in maat en getal Jan van Busschbach.

We show that MP can be used to allocate resources to treatments within and between patient populations, using a policy-relevant example. The outcome is.

Why Patient-Reported Outcomes Are Important: Growing Implications and Applications for Rheumatologists Ron D. Hays, Ph.D. UCLA Department of Medicine RAND.

1 A Health Economic View on Borderline Personality Disorder Prof. dr. Jan Busschbach Viersprong Institute for studies on Personality Disorders Medical.

(Cost-)Effectiveness of Psychotherapy for Personality Disorders Jan van Busschbach Prof. Dr. J. van Busschbach Department of Medical Psychology and Psychotherapy.

Using a discrete choice experiment with duration to estimate values for health states on the QALY scale Nick Bansback Assistant Professor School of Population.

Outcomes that matter to patients: Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for people with renal replacement UK Renal Registry 2015 Annual Audit Meeting.

1 Interactive Introduction cost effectiveness Jan J. v. Busschbach, Ph.D. Psychotherapeutic Centrum ‘De Viersprong’, Halsteren

1 Cost-Effectiveness in Medicine An Interactive Introduction  Jan J. v. Busschbach, Ph.D.  Erasmus MC Institute for Medical Psychology and Psychotherapy.

Health Economics II –2010 Health Economic Evaluations Part III Lecture 2 Cost-effectiveness analysis QALYs and cost-utility analysis Nils-Olov Stålhammar.

End-of-life premiums in reimbursement decision making Christopher McCabe PhD Capital Health Endowed Research Chair University of Alberta.

Making Cost Effectiveness Analyses more useful: Budget Impact Curves Christopher McCabe PhD Endowed Research Chair in Emergency Medicine Research University.

1 Dyslexia and Cost Effectiveness Prof. dr. Jan van Busschbach De Viersprong Erasmus MC.

Exploring The Impact of Wound Complications Upon the Lives of Patients.

1 EuroQol EQ-5D Jan J. V. Busschbach, Ph.D Psychotherapeutic Centrum ‘De Viersprong’, Halsteren Department of Medical.

MAPPING THE DIABETES HEALTH PROFILE (DHP-18) ONTO THE EQ-5D AND SF-6D GENERIC PREFERENCE BASED MEASURES OF HEALTH Brendan Mulhern 1, Keith Meadows 2, Donna.

1 EQ-5D, HUI and SF-36 Of the shelf instruments…..

1 Health Economics  Comparing different allocations  Should we spent our money on Wheel chairs Screening for cancer  Comparing costs  Comparing outcome.

Overview of the EQ-5D Purpose and origins of the descriptive system.

1 The valuation of disease-specific questionnaires for QALY analysis  To rescue data in absence of an utility measure  Growth hormone deficiency in adults.

Is healthcare any good for patients? Measuring health outcomes using EQ-5D Professor Paul Kind Principal Investigator Outcomes Research Group Centre for.

How can societal concerns for fairness be integrated in economic evaluations of health programs? Erik Nord, PhD, Senior Researcher, Norwegian Institute.

Why use the EQ-5D? What are the alternatives?. What are the alternatives for Direct valuation? Other VAS Time Trade-Off Standard Gamble Willingness to.

EQ-5D AND QUALITY OF LIFE OF OSTEOPOROSIS AT-RISK PATIENTS IN A SWEDISH OSTEOPOROSIS PATIENT REGISTRY Arun Krishna 1, Dan Mellström 2, Zhiyi Li 3, Chun-Po.

1 Patient values or values from the general public.

Overview - Social care for older and disabled people Gordon Deuchars Age UK London 12 June 2012.

1 The valuation of disease-specific health states to facilitate economic evaluation E. Kok, E. Stolk, Jan J. v. Busschbach Address: –Jan v. Busschbach.

Interactive Introduction cost effectiveness Jan J. v. Busschbach, Ph.D Viersprong Institute for studies on Personality Disorders (VISPD)

Development of Physical and Mental Health Summary Scores from PROMIS Global Items Ron D. Hays ( ) UCLA Department of Medicine

1 EQ-5D, HUI and SF-36 Of the shelf instruments…..

The experience of Denmark with Summary Measures of Population Health 7 th Meeting of the Task Force on Health Expectancies Luxembourg, 2 December 2008.

Governance and Public Policy: a NICE example John Brazier Professor of Health Economics, ScHARR, University of Sheffield, UK With thanks to Matt Stevenson.

The third international stroke trial (IST-3) effect of thrombolysis on outcomes at 18 months in 2348 patients in long-term follow- up cohort The IST3 collaborative.

Overview of Health-Related Quality of Life Measures May 22, 2014 (1:00 – 2:00 PDT) Kaiser Methods Webinar Series 1 Ron D.Hays, Ph.D.

Dr. Tricia Hale. LPC Counseling Center.  Friendship  Parent-child  Boss-worker  Boyfriend-girlfriend  Sibling  Roommate SOME EXAMPLES OF RELATIONSHIPS:

Cost-Effectiveness of Psychotherapy for Personality Disorders Soeteman, Busschbach, Verheul.

Cost-effectiveness in the quest to convince the outside world Dr. Jan Busschbach De Viersprong Erasmus MC

1 Health outcome valuation study in Thailand Sirinart Tongsiri Research degree student Health Services Research Unit, Public Health & Policy Department.

1 Interactive Introduction Cost Effectiveness and Psychotherapy Jan J. v. Busschbach, Ph.D. Psychotherapeutic Centrum ‘De Viersprong’, Halsteren

1 The Economics of Health Care and New Technologies Friday October 18, 2002 Between Technology and Humanity, Brussels Jan Busschbach PhD, –Department of.

Applying Expectancy-value Model to understand Health Preference An Exploratory Study Xu-Hao Zhang Department of Pharmacy National University of Singapore.

Hermann P. G. Schneider, Alastair H. MacLennan and David Feeny

Relationships Types of Relationships Benefits of Relationships Healthy vs. Unhealthy Dating.

“Introduction to Patient Preference Methods used for QALYs” Presented by: Jan Busschbach, PhD, Chair Section Medical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Department.

Cost-Effectiveness of Psychotherapy (for Personality Disorders) Prof. dr. Jan van Busschbach.

Overlap between Subjective Well-being and Health-related Quality of Life. 3 Ron D. Hays, Ph.D. (Alina Palimaru) November 18, 2015 (11:30-12:00 noon) Geriatric.

Cost and Benefits. Introduction Is treatment X worth it?

(Cost-)Effectiveness of Psychotherapy for Personality Disorders Jan van Busschbach Prof. Dr. J. van Busschbach Department of Medical Psychology and Psychotherapy.

Effect of framing of death on health state values obtained from DCEs Dr. Esther W. de Bekker-Grob by Jonker, de.

Who is involved in making NICE guidance recommendations and what evidence do they look at? Heidi Livingstone, Senior Public Involvement Adviser.

Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) Assessment in Outcome Studies Ron D. Hays, Ph.D. UCLA/RAND GCRC Summer Course “The.

The determinants of change in the cost-effectiveness threshold Mike Paulden, MSc 1 James O’Mahony, PhD 2 Christopher McCabe, PhD 1 1 Department of Emergency.

1 Cost-Effectiveness in Medicine An Interactive Introduction  Jan J. v. Busschbach, Ph.D.  Erasmus MC Institute for Medical Psychology and Psychotherapy.

Canadian TTO Valuations of the EQ-5D-5L: East versus West Differences

1 Utilization of Quality of Life Research in Decision-Making and Policy  Prof. Dr. Jan J.V. Busschbach  Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands  Section.

Cost effectiveness Analysis: Valuing Health; Valuing Research!

M. Dakoutrou, V. Gerovasili, G. Sidiras, I. Patsaki, A. Kouvarakos, S

Effect of framing of death on health state values obtained from DCEs

The valuation of disease-specific questionnaires for QALY analysis

Is healthcare any good for patients

Measuring outcomes Emma Frew October 2012.

How to Measure Quality of Life

Patient-reported Outcome Measures

Presentation transcript:

Big Q and Little Q revisited Christopher McCabe PhD Capital Health Endowed Research Chair in Emergency Medicine Research

Acknowledgements Capital Health Research Chair Endowment, UK National Institute for Health Research. Co-authors: D.Meads, C Czoski-Murray, C. Rutherford, C. Dealey, E. McGinnis, N. Stubbs, L. Wilson, J. Nixon, C. Hulme (Universities of Leeds and Sidney, Leeds Community Health Care NHS Trust)

Overview PROs and Value Based Reimbursement Decisions Generic vs. Condition specific PROs Q from EQ-5D or Q from PuQol_UI Implications for Reimbursement Conclusion

PROs in Reimbursement Preference-based PROs = Q in the QALYs. QALYs = value in value based decision making. Value = index used to choose what to pay for.

0 Health care expenditures QALYs per $1,000 A model of CEA based reimbursement Current treatments covered by health care system Budget Treatments not covered by the health care system Better value Worse value Willingness to Pay

0 Budget Willingness to Pay New Willingness to Pay QALYs per $1,000 Health care expenditures A model of CEA based reimbursement

Condition Specific PRO: PuQol_UI

Generic: EQ-5D-3L Five Dimensions: Mobility, Self Care, Usual Activities, Pain, Anxiety and Depression Three response levels No problems Some problems Sever problems/unable

PuQol_UI vs EQ-5D N= 100 Sex49% Female Mean age (range)77.2 ( ) Wheelchair users50% PU Grade Superficial (grades 1-2)54% Severe (grades 3-4)46%

Mean Utilities by Pressure Ulcer Severity Mean (SD) SuperficialSevere PUQoL-UI0.72 (0.17)0.67 (0.17) EQ-5D0.24 (0.36)0.15 (0.38)

Big Q and Little Q EQ-5D Best Health State No problems walking about No problems with self care No problems with performing my usual activities I have no pain or discomfort I am not anxious or depressed PUQol_UI Best Health State I have no bother at with annoying pain and discomfort I have no bother adjusting myself in bed I have no bother with washing myself I have no bother with reduced energy levels I have no bother with feeling depressed I have no bother with feeling like a burden or a nuisance I have no bother with going out

Big Q and Little Q EQ-5D Worst Health State Confined to bed I am unable to wash or dress myself I am unable to perform my usual activities I have extreme pain or discomfort I am extremely anxious or depressed PUQol_UI Best Worst State I have a lot of bother at with annoying pain and discomfort I have a lot of bother adjusting myself in bed I have a lot of bother with washing myself I have a lot of bother with reduced energy levels I have a lot of bother with feeling depressed I have a lot of bother with feeling like a burden or a nuisance I have a lot of bother with going out

Question Does anyone think these are equivalent scales?

Valued Effect per $1,000 0 Health care expenditures QALYs per $1,000 Changing the Value Index: Implications for Reimbursement Current treatments covered by health care system Budget Treatments not covered by the health care system Better value Worse value Willingness to Pay

Valued Effect per $1,000 0 Health care expenditures Current treatments covered by health care system Budget Treatments not covered by the health care system Better value Worse value Willingness to Pay Changing the Value Index: Implications for Reimbursement

Valued Effect per $1,000 0 Health care expenditures Changing the Value Index: Implications for Reimbursement Current treatments covered by health care system Budget Treatments not covered by the health care system Better value Worse value Willingness to Pay

Valued Effect per $1,000 0 Health care expenditures Changing the Value Index: Implications for Reimbursement Current treatments covered by health care system Budget Treatments not covered by the health care system Better value Worse value Willingness to Pay

Valued Effect per $1,000 0 Health care expenditures Changing the Value Index: Implications for Reimbursement Current treatments covered by health care system Budget Treatments not covered by the health care system Better value Worse value Willingness to Pay

Equity and PROs in Reimbursement Vertical – Treating unequals Unequally Horizontal – Treating equally Equally

Conclusion Using PROs in Reimbursement Decision Process – Promote ‘apples vs oranges’ decisions – Impede both vertical and horizontal equity HANDLE WITH CARE