OBJECTIVES: In previous work, people living with a non-healthy family member were willing to sacrifice a large proportion of their remaining life expectancy to improve their family member’s health. This resulted in high non-patient disutilities. This study aimed to further explore non-patient utilities in the general population.

METHODS: An online survey included time trade-off (TTO) exercises describing hypothetical family members (partner/child/parent/grandparent) in moderately and severely impaired health states. Participants were asked how many years of their own remaining life they would be willing to sacrifice for their family member to be fully healthy again by donating an organ. Half of participants were instructed to only focus on the impact on their own quality of life (QoL) in the TTO exercises to control for altruism. TTO results were calculated into disutility scores (time sacrificed divided by remaining life expectancy).

RESULTS: A total of 373 adults living in the UK were included in the analysis (mean age = 48.46). The largest sacrifices were made to restore a child to full health from a severe health state (mean disutility score = 66% of remaining life expectancy) and moderate state (53%). The smallest sacrifice was for a grandparent to full health from a moderate state (27%). The disutility scores for those who were instructed to focus on their own QoL did not significantly differ from those not receiving this instruction (p-values > 0.05), where those focusing on their own QoL also made larger sacrifices for a child from a severe state (67%).

CONCLUSIONS: Using TTO in the general population to elicit non-patient utilities resulted in high disutility estimates for each family member. Individuals were also willing to sacrifice more for children and less for grandparents. Instructions to control for altruism had no significant effects on outcomes. The role of altruism needs to be further explored and discussed.