OBJECTIVES: The impact of hereditary angioedema (HAE) on patients’ health related quality of life (QoL) extends beyond the acute attack period. This study was to value the disutility of living with HAE outside of the acute attack period, according to different emergency treatments available to the patient. METHODS: The study used a vignette/health state scenario based approach and standard gamble methodology. The health states described three different circumstances faced by patients with HAE in terms of availability of emergency medications should they suffer a swelling attack: Scenario A: HAE without any effective emergency medication; Scenario B: HAE with effective emergency medication available in hospital; Scenario C: HAE with effective emergency medication available for self-administration. The health state descriptions were based evidence from on relevant clinical trials, burden of disease and QoL studies and HAE treatment guidelines, supported by clinical expert opinion. The standard gamble survey was web based/administered online. Respondents were recruited from an existing consumer research panel. RESULTS: A total of 201 respondents completed the survey; 91% were prepared to gamble with death to achieve perfect health in at least one of the three health states. The mean utility weighting elicited for health state C was significantly higher than either weightings elicited for health state B (0.75 [95%CI. 0.71, 0.79] versus 0.64 [95% CI 0.60, 0.69]; p<0.001), or for health state A (0.75 [95%CI. 0.71, 0.79] versus 0.62 [95% CI 0.58, 0.67]; p<0.001). There was no statistical difference between the utilities elicited for health states B and A. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate the recognition of and value placed on the QoL benefits provided by the availability of and immediate access to a self-administered emergency medication for HAE over that provided by treatment available only in the hospital accident and emergency treatment setting. .