The Influence of Recall and Timing of Assessment on the Estimation of the QALY When Health Fluctuates Recurrently

Author(s)

Sanghera S1, Coast J2, Walther A3, Peters T4
1University of Bristol, Bristol, BST, UK, 2University of Bristol, Bristol, UK, 3University Hospitals Bristol, Bristol, Bristol, UK, 4University of Bristol, Bristol, Bristol, UK

OBJECTIVES: When health fluctuates recurrently, obtaining meaningful quality-of-life estimates is challenging. Quality-of-life changes may be missed or over/underestimated due to measures’ recall periods and timing. Using chemotherapy as a case study, we compare responses using different recall periods and timing to inform how/when to capture quality-of-life during predictable recurrent fluctuations in health; and consider the implications for other contexts with fluctuations.

METHODS: During one 3-weekly cycle of chemotherapy for cancer, patients were randomly assigned to complete:

(1) EQ-5D-5L daily with a daily recall period, weekly with a weekly timeframe, and at 3 weeks with a 3-week timeframe

(2) SF-12v2 daily with a daily recall period, weekly with a weekly timeframe, and at 3 weeks with a 3-week timeframe;

(3) SF-12v2 daily with a 3-week recall period;

Utilities (values anchored at 1 (full-health) and 0 (dead)) were generated and repeated measures ANOVA, t-tests and effect sizes calculated.

RESULTS: 503 patients consented; all 21 daily questionnaires were completed by 84(50%), 67(40%), 72(43%) in the groups respectively.

Both measures captured fluctuations in quality-of-life suggesting differences are due to recall effects. Mean daily scores were greater than scores for the past week at days 7, 14 and 21 (p<0.0001), which were greater than the past 3 weeks (p<0.0001).

By capturing quality-of-life with a ‘past week’ recall at days 7, 14 or 21, utility was overestimated by 0.0782 to 0.0266, with the comparison at day 7 reaching a minimally important difference.

Capturing quality-of-life with ‘past 3 weeks’ overestimated utility by 0.0746 and 0.0310 for EQ-5D and SF-6D, heavily skewed by the first treatment week.

CONCLUSIONS: Current practice of using a single estimate with a daily (EQ-5D) or longer (SF-12/SF-36) recall could bias cost-effectiveness estimates. Quality-of-life should be captured frequently with short recall when fluctuations are likely, with longer recall less frequently in more stable periods.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2024-11, ISPOR Europe 2024, Barcelona, Spain

Value in Health, Volume 27, Issue 12, S2 (December 2024)

Acceptance Code

P41

Topic

Economic Evaluation, Patient-Centered Research

Topic Subcategory

Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis, Health State Utilities, Instrument Development, Validation, & Translation, Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes

Disease

no-additional-disease-conditions-specialized-treatment-areas

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×