Valuation of the EQ Health and Well-being Short Using Time Trade-Off and Discrete Choice Experiments: A Feasibility Study
Mukuria C1, Peasgood T2, McDool E1, Norman R3, Rowen D1, Brazier JE1
1University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK, 2University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia, 3Curtin University, Perth, Australia
OBJECTIVES: The EQ Health and Wellbeing Short (EQ-HWB-S) is a new generic measure that covers aspects of health and wellbeing. It has been developed for use in cost utility analysis for interventions which may impact patients, social care users or informal carers. The aim was to test the feasibility of using time trade-off (cTTO) and discrete choice experiment (DCE) administered using the EuroQol Valuation Technology research protocol to derive utilities for the EQ-HWB-S.
METHODS: EQ-HWB-S utilities were elicited using cTTO and DCE tasks with adaptations to fit the new measure. Participants (target n=600) from the UK general population were sampled based on age, sex and ethnicity. Interviews were undertaken using video-conferencing. Quality control (QC) steps were used to assess interviewers’ performance throughout the study. Data were modelled using linear, Tobit, probit and hybrid models. Feasibility was assessed based on the evaluation of the distribution of cTTO data, QC assessment and regression modelling results. Regression results were assessed based on theoretical considerations, monotonicity and statistical significance.
RESULTS: There were 521 participants who provided cTTO and DCE data. The demographic characteristics were broadly representative of the UK general population although participants were more educated and there were slightly more females. Interviewers met QC requirements. cTTO values ranged between -1 to 1 with increasing disutility associated with more severe states. The hybrid Tobit heteroscedastic model had values ranging from -0.384 to 1. Pain, mobility, daily activities, sad/depressed had the largest disutilities followed by loneliness, anxiety, exhaustion, control and cognition in this model.
CONCLUSIONS: EQ-HWB-S can be valued using cTTO and DCE administered using EQ-VT. The results offer an opportunity to test the validity of the EQ-HWB-S utilities. Further methodological work is recommended to develop a valuation protocol specific to the EQ-HWB-S.
Conference/Value in Health Info
Value in Health, Volume 25, Issue 12S (December 2022)
Health State Utilities, Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas