Search

Objectives This study aimed to investigate whether the profit margins of pharmaceuticals would influence the outcome of reimbursement decisions within the Dutch policy context. Methods We conducted a discrete choice experiment among 58 Dutch decision makers. In 20 choice sets, we asked respondents to indicate which of 2 pharmaceutical treatment options they would select for reimbursement. Options were described using 5 attributes (disease severity, incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year, health gain, budget impact, and profit margin) with 3 levels each. Additionally, cognitive debriefing questions were presented, and for validation debriefing, interviews were conducted. Choice data were analyzed using mixed logit models, also to calculate marginal effects and choice probabilities. Results Results indicated that the specified levels of profit margins significantly influenced choices made. Decision makers were less likely to reimburse a product with a higher profit margin. The relative importance of profit margins was lower than that of the included traditional health technology assessment criteria, but not negligible. When asked directly, 61% of respondents indicated that profit margin should play a role in reimbursement decision making, although concerns about feasibility and the connection to price negotiations were voiced. Conclusions Our results suggest that if available to decision makers the profit margin of pharmaceutical products would influence reimbursement decisions within the Dutch policy context. Higher profit margins would reduce the likelihood of reimbursement. Whether adding profit margin as an additional, explicit criterion to the health technology assessment decision framework would be feasible and desirable is open to further exploration.

The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the need for effective infectious disease outbreak prevention. This could entail installing an integrated, international early warning system, aiming to contain and mitigate infectious diseases outbreaks. The amount of resources governments should spend on such preventive measures can be informed by the value citizens attach to such a system. This was already recognized in 2018, when a contingent valuation willingness to pay (WTP) experiment was fielded, eliciting the WTP for such a system in six European countries. We replicated that experiment in the spring of 2020 to test whether and how WTP had changed during an actual pandemic (COVID-19), taking into account differences in infection rates and stringency of measures by government between countries. Overall, we found significant increases in WTP between the two time points, with mean WTP for an early warning system increasing by about 50% (median 30%), from around €20 to €30 per month. However, there were marked differences between countries and subpopulations, and changes were only partially explained by COVID-19 burden. We discuss possible explanations for and implication of our findings. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10198-021-01353-6.

Currently, reimbursement decisions based on health technology assessments (HTA) in the Netherlands mostly concern outpatient pharmaceuticals. The Dutch government aspires to broaden the systematic application of full HTA towards other types of health care in order to optimise the content of the basic benefit package. This paper identifies important challenges for broadening the scope of full HTA to other types of health care. Based on a description of the Dutch reimbursement decision-making process, five important characteristics of outpatient pharmaceuticals were identified, which are all relevant to the successful application of HTA: (i) closed reimbursement system, (ii) absence of alternative policy measures, (iii) existence of marketing authorisation, (iv) identifiable and accountable counterparty, and (v) product characteristics. For a selection of other types of health care, which may be subject to HTA more frequently in the future, deviations from these characteristics of outpatient pharmaceuticals are discussed. The implications of such deviations for performing HTA and the decision-making process are highlighted. It is concluded that broadening the application of HTA will require policy makers to meet both important policy-related and methodological challenges. These challenges differ per health care domain, which may inform policy makers which expansions of the current use of HTA are most feasible.

Background and Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic and the measures taken by governments to contain it have affected many aspects of the daily lives of citizens. This study aimed to describe changes in the productivity of paid work and time allocation to paid and unpaid work and leisure resulting from working at home during the pandemic. Methods: A sample of 851 people from the Netherlands who had paid work (≥ 24 h/week) and worked at least 4 hours per week extra at home because of lockdown measures completed a questionnaire during the first COVID-19 lockdown (April 2020). Respondents reported time spent on paid and unpaid work and leisure before and during the lockdown. Productivity was measured in terms of quantity and quality of paid work. Results: On average, respondents spent less time (14%) on paid work and productivity decreased 5.5%. Changes in productivity were associated with the age of children, net income and having a separate home office. Respondents spent more time on unpaid work (27%) and leisure (11%). Women spent more time on unpaid work in absolute but not in relative terms. People with a partner and with children spent more time on unpaid work and less time on leisure. Conclusions: Productivity of paid work decreased, and people reallocated time between paid and unpaid work and leisure during the first COVID-19 lockdown. Changes in time allocation and productivity differed across subgroups. If working at home becomes more common, future research should focus on the long-term impact on productivity and mental and physical health.

_Objectives:_ Decision-making frameworks that draw on economic evaluations increasingly use equity weights to facilitate a more equitable and fair allocation of healthcare resources. These weights can be attached to health gains or reflected in the monetary threshold against which the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of (new) health technologies are evaluated. Currently applied weights are based on different definitions of disease severity and do not account for age-related preferences in society. However, age has been shown to be an important equity-relevant characteristic. This study examines the willingness to pay (WTP) for health-related quality of life (QOL) gains in relation to the disease severity and age of patients, and the outcome of the disease. _Methods:_ We obtained WTP estimates by applying contingent-valuation tasks in a representative sample of the public in The Netherlands (n = 2023). We applied random-effects generalized least squares regression models to estimate the effect of patients’ disease severity and age, size of QOL gains, disease outcome (full recovery/death 1 year after falling ill), and respondent characteristics on the WTP. _Results:_ Respondents’WTP was higher for more severely ill and younger patients and for larger-sized QOL gains, but lower for patients who died. However, the relations were nonlinear and context dependent. Respondents with a lower age, who were male, had a higher household income, and a higher QOL stated a higher WTP for QOL gains. _Conclusions:_ Our results suggest that—if the aim is to align resource-allocation decisions in healthcare with societal preferences—currently applied equity weights do not suffice.

People do not only care about maximizing health gains but also about their distribution. For example, they give more weight to younger patients than older patients. This pilot study aims to investigate if age weighting is reinforced by loss aversion if young people are falling behind one's perceived ‘normal’ quality of life (QoL), while older people do not. We apply a person trade-off method in a large representative sample (n = 990) to estimate age weighting factors. We also measure QoL levels that individuals regard as ‘normal’ for different ages, serving as reference points. We observe a considerable amount of age weighting, with 20-year-old patients on average receiving 1.7 times as much weight as 80-year-old patients. Perceived ‘normal’ QoL rapidly decreases with age of a patient. Older people are more optimistic about what constitutes ‘normal QoL’ than younger people, but they express a faster decline in normal QoL due to aging. Respondents who view all improvements to be gain enlarging show the least age weighting, but loss aversion cannot explain the results. Still, one's age-related reference level is an important predictor of age weights. Given the explorative nature of this study, further studies are called for to generate more robust evidence.

Objectives Medical devices are potentially good candidates for coverage with evidence development (CED) schemes, as clinical data at market entry are often sparse and (cost-)effectiveness depends on real-world use. The objective of this research was to explore the diffusion of CED schemes for devices in Europe, and the factors that favour or hamper their utilization. Methods We conducted structured interviews with 25 decision-makers from 22 European countries to explore the characteristics of existing CED programmes for devices, and how decision makers perceived 13 pre-identified challenges associated with initiating and operating CED schemes for devices. We also collected data on individual schemes that were either initiated or still ongoing in the last 5 years. Results We identified seven countries with CED programmes for devices and 78 ongoing schemes. The characteristics of CED programmes varied across countries, including eligibility criteria, roles and responsibilities of stakeholders, funding arrangements, and type of decisions being contemplated at the outset of each scheme. We observed a high variability in how decision makers perceived CED-related challenges possibly reflecting country-specific arrangements and different experiences with CED. One general finding across all countries was that relatively little attention was paid to the evaluation of schemes, both during and at their completion. Conclusions CED programmes for devices with different characteristics exist in Europe. Decision-makers’ perceptions differ on the challenges associated with these schemes. More exchange of knowledge and experience will help decision makers anticipate the likely challenges in CED schemes for devices, and to learn from good practices existing elsewhere.

INTRODUCTION: Performance-based risk-sharing agreements (PBRSAs), between payers, health care providers, and technology manufacturers can be useful when there is uncertainty about the (cost-) effectiveness of a new technology or service. However, they can be challenging to design and implement. AREAS COVERED: A total of 18 performance-based agreements were identified through a literature review. All but two of the agreements identified were pay-for-performance schemes, agreed between providers and payers at the national level. No examples were found of agreements between health care providers and manufacturers at the local level. The potential for these local agreements was illustrated by hypothetical case studies of water quality management and an integrated chronic kidney disease program. EXPERT OPINION: Performance-based risk-sharing agreements can work to the advantage of patients, health care providers, payers, and technology manufacturers, particularly if they facilitate the introduction of technologies or systems of care that might not have been introduced otherwise. However, the design, conduct, and implementation of PBRSAs in renal care pose a number of challenges. Efforts should be made to overcome these challenges so that more renal care patients can benefit from technological advances and new models of care.

IntroductionMost collectively funded healthcare systems set limits to their benefit package. Doing so requires judgements which may involve economic evaluations. Performing such evaluations brings methodological challenges, which may be more pronounced in non-pharmaceutical interventions. For example, for medical devices, the validity of assessment results may be limited by learning effects, incremental innovation of the devices and the context-dependency of their outcomes.ObjectiveTo review the extent to which "learning effects", "incremental innovation" (related to outcomes) and "context-dependency" are included and/or discussed in peer reviewed economic evaluations on medical devices using Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implementation (TAVI) as an example.MethodsA systematic review was performed including full economic evaluations of TAVI for operable patients with aortic stenosis identified using the Pubmed database. Study characteristics, study results and text fragments concerning the aforementioned aspects were extracted. The quality of the studies was assessed using a quality checklist (CHEC-extended).ResultsWithin 207 screened records, 15 studies were identified. Two studies referred to all three aspects, four studies referred to none. "Learning effects" were discussed in five studies, one of which described a method to cope with this challenge. “Incremental innovation” was described in seven studies. Limitations in generalizability of results related to context of care provision were discussed in seven studies.ConclusionThe challenges related to economic evaluations of TAVI and their influence on the validity of reported results, are typically only partly discussed and rarely dealt within peer reviewed studies. It is important for better informed policy decisions that this improves.

One core assumption of standard economic theory is that an individual’s preferences are stable, irrespective of the method used to elicit them. This assumption may be violated if preference reversals are observed when comparing different methods to elicit people’s preferences. People may then prefer A over B using one method while preferring B over A using another. Such preference reversals pose a significant problem for theoretical and applied research. We used a sample of medical and economics students to investigate preference reversals in the health and financial domain when choosing patients/clients. We explored whether preference reversals are associated with domain-relevant training and tested whether using guided ‘choice list’ elicitation reduces reversals. Our findings suggest that preference reversals were more likely to occur for medical students, within the health domain, and for open-ended valuation questions. Familiarity with a domain reduced the likelihood of preference reversals in that domain. Although preference reversals occur less frequently within specialist domains, they remain a significant theoretical and practical problem. The use of clearer valuation procedures offers a promising approach to reduce preference reversals.

Standard gamble (SG) typically yields higher health state valuations than time trade‐off (TTO), which may be caused by biases affecting both methods. It has been suggested that TTO yields more accurate health state valuations, because TTO is subject to both upward and downward biases that may cancel out. Verifying this claim, however, would require a golden standard to test validity against. In this study, we attempted to provide a first direct test of the validity of health state valuation. A total of 119 students completed five TTO and SG tasks. Afterwards, their health state valuations elicited with TTO and SG were shown to them in an interactive graph. Respondents were asked to indicate which of the methods represented their valuation of a health state best. They could also adjust their valuation. Overall, we found that respondents indicated that TTO valuations better reflected health state valuations, a result that was more pronounced for more severe health states. When offered the opportunity, on average, respondents adjusted health state valuations downwards. These findings may have implications for future work on (bias correction in) health state valuations.

Background: The CarerQol instrument can be used in economic evaluations to measure the care-related quality of life of informal caregivers. Tariff sets are available for Australia, Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, the UK, and the USA. Objective: Our objective was to develop tariff sets for the CarerQol instrument for Hungary, Poland and Slovenia and to compare these with the existing value sets. Methods: Discrete-choice experiments were carried out in Hungary, Poland and Slovenia. Data were collected through an online survey between November 2018 and January 2019, using representative samples of 1000 respondents per country. Tariffs were calculated from coefficient estimates from panel mixed multinomial logit models with random parameters. Results: All seven CarerQol domains contributed significantly to the utility associated with different caregiving situations. Attributes valued highest were ‘physical health’ (tariffs for no problems were 15.6–21.8), ‘mental health’ (18.1–18.9) and ‘fulfilment’ (16.3–22.9). Value sets were comparable across the countries, although in Poland ‘a lot of fulfilment’ was valued higher (22.9) than in Hungary (16.3) and Slovenia (17.1). Compared with existing value sets, in the three Central European countries, ‘fulfilment’ was more important, whereas ‘financial problems’ were less important. Conclusion: For the first time in the Central and Eastern European region, country-specific tariffs are now available for the Hungarian, Polish and Slovenian versions of the CarerQol instrument. This facilitates inclusion of the impact of informal care in economic evaluations. Our results can be used to develop and evaluate country-specific health policy strategies to support informal caregivers. The differences found in informal care preferences highlight the limited transferability of CarerQol tariffs across European regions.

Objectives This study aimed (1) to perform a systematic literature review of instruments for measuring productivity loss of paid and unpaid work and (2) to assess the suitability (in terms of identification, measurement, and valuation) of these instruments for use in health economic evaluations from a societal perspective. Methods Articles published from 2018 were sourced from PubMed/Medline, PsycInfo, Embase, and Econlit. Using 2 separate search strategies, eligible economic evaluations and validation studies were selected and unique measurement instruments identified. A data-extraction form was developed by studying previous literature and consulting an international panel of experts in the field of productivity costs. This data-extraction form was applied to assess the suitability of instruments for use in economic evaluations. Results A total of 5982 articles were retrieved from the databases, of which 99 economic evaluations and 9 validation studies were included in the review. A total of 42 unique measurement instruments were identified. Nine instruments provided quantified measures of absenteeism, presenteeism, and unpaid work. Five instruments supplied the necessary information to enable the use of at least 1 common valuation method. The Health and Labour Questionnaire-Short Form, Health and Labour Questionnaire, and Institute for Medical Technology Assessment Productivity Cost Questionnaire met both criteria. Nevertheless, the developers replaced the Health and Labour Questionnaire-Short Form and Health and Labour Questionnaire by the more recently developed Institute for Medical Technology Assessment Productivity Cost Questionnaire. Conclusions Although many instruments for measuring productivity loss were identified, most were not suitable for capturing productivity changes for economic evaluations from a societal perspective. Future research can benefit from this study by making an informed instrument choice for the measurement of productivity loss of paid and unpaid work.

Objectives: Cost-effectiveness analyses typically require measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) to estimate quality-adjusted life-years. Challenges with measuring HRQoL arise in the context of episodic conditions if patients are less likely—or even unable—to complete surveys when having disease symptoms. This article explored whether HRQoL measured at regular time intervals adequately reflects the HRQoL of people with epilepsy (PWE). Methods: Follow-up data from the Epilepsy Support Dog Evaluation study on the (cost-)effectiveness of seizure dogs were used in which HRQoL is measured in 25 PWE with the EQ-5D at baseline and every 3 months thereafter. Seizure count is recorded daily using a seizure diary. Regression models were employed to explore whether PWE were more likely to complete the HRQoL survey on a good day (ie, when seizures are absent or low in frequency compared with other days) and to provide an estimate of the impact of reporting HRQoL on a good day on EQ-5D utility scores. Results: A total of 111 HRQoL measurements were included in the analyses. Regression analyses indicated that the day of reporting HRQoL was associated with a lower seizure count (P

Medical interventions that increase life expectancy of patients result in additional consumption of non-medical goods and services in 'added life years'. This paper focuses on the distributional consequences across socio-economic groups of including these costs in cost effectiveness analysis. In that context, it also highlights the role of remaining quality of life and household economies of scale. Data from a Dutch household spending survey was used to estimate non-medical consumption and household size by age and educational attainment. Estimates of non-medical consumption and household size were combined with life tables to estimate what the impact of including non-medical survivor costs would be on the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of preventing a death at a certain age. Results show that including non-medical survivor costs increases estimated ICERs most strongly when interventions are targeted at the higher educated. Adjusting for household size (lower educated people less often live additional life years in multi-person households) and quality of life (lower educated people on average spend added life years in poorer health) mitigates this difference. Ignoring costs of non-medical consumption in economic evaluations implicitly favors interventions targeted at the higher educated and thus potentially amplifies socio-economic inequalities in health.

In the evaluation of well-being, it is not only important what people have in absolute terms, but also how this compares to reference points in relative terms. We explore the relevance of relative comparisons by testing the effect of people's self-rated position on potential reference points for income and health on their subjective well-being. We used Multiple Discrepancies Theory as a framework to identify seven potentially relevant reference points for income and health. A representative sample (N = 550) of the Netherlands assessed their income and health relative to these reference points. In addition, we elicited monthly household income, health status (EQ-5D-5L), and subjective well-being (SWLS). In line with the literature, we found a negative convex relationship between subjective well-being and age and a positive relationship with being employed, income, and health. For income, subjective well-being was also associated with how current income compared to respondents' needs and progression over time, and for health especially with how current health compared to what they felt they deserved. Our findings suggest that income and health are important for subjective well-being both in absolute and relative terms. We found negative effects on life satisfaction if some of the domain specific reference points were not met.

Background Priority setting in healthcare can be guided by both efficiency and equity principles. The latter principle is often explicated in terms of disease severity and, for example, defined as absolute or proportional shortfall. These severity operationalizations do not explicitly consider patients' age, even though age may be inextricably related to severity and an equity-relevant characteristic. Objective This study examines the relative strength of societal preferences for severity and age for informing allocation decisions in healthcare. Methods We elicited preferences for severity and age in a representative sample of the public in The Netherlands (N = 1025) by applying choice tasks and person-trade-off tasks in a design in which severity levels and ages varied both separately and simultaneously between patient groups. We calculated person trade-off ratios and, in addition, applied ordinary least squares regression models to aid interpretation of the ratios when both severity and age varied. Results Respondents attached a higher weight (median of ratios: 2.46-3.50) to reimbursing treatment for relatively more severely ill and younger patients when preferences for both were elicited separately. When preferences were elicited simultaneously, respondents attached a higher weight (median of ratios: 1.98 and 2.42) to reimbursing treatment for relatively younger patients, irrespective of patients’ severity levels. Ratios varied depending on severity level and age and were generally higher when the difference in severity and age was larger between groups. Conclusions Our results suggest that severity operationalizations and equity weights based on severity alone may not align with societal preferences. Adjusting decision-making frameworks to reflect age-related societal preferences should be considered.

Background and Objectives Common health state valuation methodology, such as time tradeoff (TTO) and standard gamble (SG), is typically applied under several descriptively invalid assumptions, for example, related to linear quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) or expected utility (EU) theory. Hence, the current use of results from health state valuation exercises may lead to biased QALY weights, which may in turn affect decisions based on economic evaluations using such weights. Methods have been proposed to correct responses for the biases associated with different health state valuation techniques. In this article we outline the relevance of prospect theory (PT), which has become the dominant descriptive alternative to EU, for health state valuations and economic evaluations. Methods and Results We provide an overview of work in this field, which aims to remove biases from QALY weights. We label this “the corrective approach.” By quantifying PT parameters, such as loss aversion, probability weighting, and nonlinear utility, it may be possible to correct TTO and SG responses for biases in an attempt to produce more valid estimates of preferences for health states. Through straightforward examples, this article illustrates the effects of this corrective approach and discusses several unresolved issues that currently limit the relevance of corrected weights for policy. Conclusions Suggestions for research addressing these issues are provided. Nonetheless, if validly corrected health state valuations become available, we argue in favor of using these in economic evaluations.

Background In the context of priority setting, a differential cost-effectiveness threshold can be used to reflect a higher societal willingness to pay for quality-adjusted life-year gains in the worse off. However, uncertainty in the estimate of severity can lead to problems when evaluating the outcomes of cost-effectiveness analyses. Objectives This study standardizes the assessment of severity, integrates its uncertainty with the uncertainty in cost-effectiveness results and provides decision makers with a new estimate: the severity-adjusted probability of being cost effective. Methods Severity is expressed in proportional and absolute shortfall and estimated using life tables and country-specific EQ-5D values. We use the three severity-based cost-effectiveness thresholds (€20.000, €50.000 and €80.000, per QALY) adopted in The Netherlands. We exemplify procedures of integrating uncertainty with a stylized example of a hypothetical oncology treatment. Results Applying our methods, taking into account the uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness results and in the estimation of severity identifies the likelihood of an intervention being cost effective when there is uncertainty about the appropriate severity-based cost-effectiveness threshold. Conclusions Higher willingness-to-pay thresholds for severe diseases are implemented in countries to reflect societal concerns for an equitable distribution of resources. However, the estimates of severity are uncertain, patient populations are heterogeneous, and this can be accounted for with the severity-adjusted probability of being cost effective proposed in this study. The application to the Netherlands suggests that not adopting the new method could result in incorrect decisions in the reimbursement of new health technologies.

Healthcare interventions that improve the health of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have the potential to affect the health of caregivers. This study compares the three-level EuroQoL-5 Dimension (EQ-5D-3L) and the Short Form-6 Dimension (SF-6D) in their ability to value such spillover effects in caregivers. Clinical data collected from two Autism Treatment Network (ATN) sites was combined with survey data of caregivers of children diagnosed with ASD. Caregivers completed instruments by proxy describing child health and completed the EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D preference-weighted instruments to describe their own health. There was a strong correlation between the health utility scores of the two preference-weighted instruments (ρ = 0.6172, p

Background Interventions in health care often not only have an efect on patients, but also on their informal caregivers.Caregiving can have a profound impact on the health and wellbeing of carers. Ignoring these spillovers in economic evaluations risks labelling interventions mistakenly as cost-efective, at the expense of informal caregivers.Objective This paper investigates willingness-to-accept (WTA) values for an hour of informal care, corrected for positiveand negative impacts of informal care, to facilitate the inclusion of informal care hours on the cost side of economic evaluations without double-counting spillover efects.Methods A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted among a representative sample of the adult population in theNetherlands (n=552) in September 2011. An experimental design minimizing the D-error was used to construct choicesets with two unlabelled alternatives with the attributes ‘hours caregiving’, ‘monetary compensation for caregiving’ andseven impacts of caregiving. To operationalize the random utility model, we used a panel mixed multinomial logit (MMNL)parameter model. For calculation of WTA, we used both population-level parameters and individual-level parameters.Results The mean WTA for an additional hour of informal care, corrected for positive and negative impacts of informal care,was €14.57. The signs of the coefcients were all in the expected directions.Conclusions This study reports a preference-based monetary value for informal care, corrected for other impacts. This valuation facilitates the inclusion of informal care hours on the cost side in economic evaluations without double-counting anyspillover efects included on the efects side.

Background We aimed to investigate the burden of informal care in Hungary (HU), Poland (PL) and Slovenia (SI). Methods A cross-sectional online survey was performed involving representative samples of 1000 respondents per country. Caregiving situations were explored; health status of informal caregivers/care recipients and care-related quality of life were assessed using the EQ-5D-5L and CarerQol-7D. Results The proportion of caregivers was (HU/PL/SI) 14.9, 15.0 and 9.6%, respectively. Their mean age was 56.1, 45.6 and 48.0, and the average time spent on informal care was 27.6, 35.5 and 28.8 h/week. Chronic care was dominant (> 1 year: 78.5%, 72.0%, 74.0%) and care recipients were mainly (own/in-law) parents. Average EQ-5D-5L scores of care recipients were 0.53, 0.49 and 0.52. For Poland and Slovenia, EQ-5D-5L scores of informal care providers were signifcantly lower than of other respondents. Average CarerQol-7D scores were (HU/PL/SI) 76.0, 69.6 and 70.9, and CarerQol-VAS was 6.8, 6.4 and 6.6, respectively. Overall, 89, 87, and 84% of caregivers felt some or a lot fulflment related to caring. Problems with combining tasks with daily activities were most important in Hungary and Slovenia. Women had a higher probability of being a caregiver in Hungary. CarerQol-7D scores were signifcantly associated with caregivers’ EQ-5D-5L scores. In Hungary and Poland, living in a larger household was positively, while caring for patients with mental health problems was negatively associated with CarerQol-7D scores. Conclusions These frst results from the Central and Eastern European region using preference-based measures for the evaluation of informal care can serve as a valuable input for health economic analyses.

Background Risk communication is a key component of public health interventions during an outbreak. As the coronavirus pandemic unfolded in late 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was at the forefront in the development of risk communication strategies. The WHO introduced a range of activities with the purpose of enabling the public to avail verified and timely information on COVID-19 prevention behaviors. Given the various WHO activities to protect the public health during COVID-19, it is important to investigate the extent of familiarity and uptake of the WHO recommendations among the public during the first wave of the pandemic. Methods To do this, we conducted a large-scale Pan-European survey covering around 7500 individuals that are representative of populations from seven European countries, collected online during April 2-April 15, 2020. We use descriptive statistics including proportions and correlations and graphical representations such as bar charts to analyze and display the data. Results Our findings suggest that information from the WHO in the context of COVID-19 is well trusted and acted upon by the public. Overall familiarity and adherence were quite high in most countries. Adherence was higher for social distancing recommendations compared to hygiene measures. Familiarity and adherence were higher among older, female, and highly educated respondents. However, country level heterogeneities were observed in the level of trust in information from the WHO, with countries severely affected by the pandemic reporting lower levels of trust. Conclusion Our findings call for efforts from health authorities to get regular feedback from the public on their familiarity and compliance with recommendations for preventive measures at all stages of the pandemic, to further develop and adapt risk communication as the pandemic evolves.

Decisions on interventions or policy alternatives affecting health can be informed by economic evaluations, like cost‐benefit or cost‐utility analyses. In this context, there is a need for valid estimates of the monetary equivalent value of health (gains), which are often expressed in € per quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs). Obtaining such estimates remains methodologically challenging, with a recent addition to the health economists' toolbox, which is based on well‐being data: The well‐being valuation approach. Using general population panel data from Germany, we put this approach to the test by investigating several empirical and conceptual challenges, such as the appropriate functional specification of income utility, the choice of health utility tariffs, or the health state dependence of consumption utility. Depending on specification, the bulk of estimated € per QALY values ranged from €20,000–60,000, with certain specifications leading to more considerable deviations, underlining persistent practical challenges when applying the well‐being valuation methodology to health and QALYs. Based on our findings, we formulate recommendations for future research and applications.

It was highlighted that in the original article [1] the graphs in Fig. 1 were duplicated. This Correction article shows the correct Fig. 1. The original article has been updated. Author details 1Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, P.O. Box 1738, 3000, DR, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. 2Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Early warning systems for infectious diseases and foodborne outbreaks are designed with the aim of increasing the health safety of citizens. As a first step to determine whether investing in such a system offers value for money, this study used contingent valuation to estimate people’s willingness to pay for such an early warning system in six European countries. The contingent valuation experiment was conducted through online questionnaires administered in February to March 2018 to cross-sectional, representative samples in the UK, Denmark, Germany, Hungary, Italy, and The Netherlands, yielding a total sample size of 3140. Mean willingness to pay for an early warning system was €21.80 (median €10.00) per household per month. Pooled regression results indicate that willingness to pay increased with household income and risk aversion, while they decreased with age. Overall, our results indicate that approximately 80–90% of people would be willing to pay for an increase in health safety in the form of an early warning system for infectious diseases and food-borne outbreaks. However, our results have to be interpreted in light of the usual drawbacks of willingness to pay experiments. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10198-020-01171-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Earlier work suggested that subjective life expectancy (SLE) functions as reference point in time trade-off (TTO), but has not tested or modelled this explicitly. In this paper we construct a model based on prospect theory to investigate these predictions more thoroughly. We report the first experimental test of reference-dependence with respect to SLE for TTO and extend this approach to standard gamble (SG). In two experiments, subjects’ SLEs were used to construct different versions of 10-year TTO and SG tasks, with the gauge duration either described as occurring above or below life expectation. Our analyses suggest that both TTO and SG weights were affected by SLE as predicted by prospect theory with SLE as reference point. Subjects gave up fewer years in TTO and were less risk-tolerant in SG below SLE, implying that weights derived from these health state valuation methods for durations below SLE will be biased upwards.

Background The 2014–2016 Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak in West Africa was the largest EVD outbreak recorded, which has triggered calls for investments that would facilitate an even earlier response. This study aims to estimate the costs and health effects of earlier interventions in Sierra Leone. Methods A deterministic and a stochastic compartment model describing the EVD outbreak was estimated using a variety of data sources. Costs and Disability-Adjusted Life Years were used to estimate and compare scenarios of earlier interventions. Results Four weeks earlier interventions would have averted 10,257 (IQR 4353–18,813) cases and 8835 (IQR 3766–16,316) deaths. This implies 456 (IQR 194–841) thousand DALYs and 203 (IQR 87–374) million $US saved. The greatest losses occurred outside the healthcare sector. Conclusions Earlier response in an Ebola outbreak saves lives and costs. Investments in healthcare system facilitating such responses are needed and can offer good value for money.

We provide some first insights into this willingness to be vaccinated, based on a multi-country European study [4], which hopefully result in more attention for this important issue.

Objectives: Coverage with evidence development (CED) schemes are particularly relevant for medical devices (MDs), since clinical evidence is often limited at the time of launch and their long-term (cost- ) effectiveness heavily depends on how they are adopted into routine clinical practice. The objective of this study was to identify and describe the challenges that payers and manufacturers might face when assessing the desirability of, choosing the research design for, implementing, and evaluating CED schemes for MDs. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed on six databases following PRISMA guidelines. Two independent reviewers assessed the eligibility of studies based on predefined criteria and extracted data from the included articles by using a pre-defined extraction template. The data were synthesised in a narrative review. Results: The systematic search yielded 4293 articles of which 27 were eligible for inclusion. We identified 20 challenges that are associated with CED schemes for MDs. Five of these challenges relate directly to the characteristics of MDs, and hence are specific to MDs. These challenges concern deciding on whether a CED scheme is required, understanding the relevant uncertainties and risks, identifying meaningful out- comes, defining an adequate duration for a scheme, and market entry of new technologies. Conclusions: Payers and manufacturers of MDs have to address the identified challenges to improve a CED scheme’s chance of success. This can be further improved by public sharing of information about the outcome of applied schemes and way in which stakeholders have addressed the challenges they faced when applying a CED scheme.

__Background__ The ICECAP-O and the ICECAP-A are validated capability well-being instruments. To be used in economic evaluations, multidimensional instruments require weighting of the distinguished well-being states. These weights are usually obtained through ex ante preference elicitation (i.e., decision utility) but could also be based on experienced utility. __Objective__ This article describes the development of value sets for ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A based on experienced utility and compares them with current decision utility weights. __Methods__ Data from 2 cross-sectional samples corresponding to the target groups of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A were used in 2 separate analyses. The utility impacts of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels were assessed through regression models using a composite measure of subjective well-being as a proxy for experienced utility. The observed utility impacts were rescaled to match the 0 to 1 range of the existing value set. __Results__ The calculated experienced utility values were similar to the decision utility weights for some of the ICECAP dimensions but deviated for others. The largest differences were found for weights of the ICECAP-O dimension enjoyment and the ICECAP-A dimensions attachment and autonomy. __Conclusions__ The results suggest a different weighting of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels if experienced utility is used instead of decision utility.

Appropriate discounting rules in economic evaluations have received considerable attention in the literature and in national guidelines for economic evaluations. Rightfully so, as discounting can be quite influential on the outcomes of economic evaluations. The most prominent controversies regarding discounting involve the basis for and height of the discount rate, whether costs and effects should be discounted at the same rate, and whether discount rates should decline or stay constant over time. Moreover, the choice for discount rules depends on the decision context one adopts as the most relevant. In this article, we review these issues and debates, and describe and discuss the current discounting recommendations of the countries publishing their national guidelines. We finish the article by proposing a research agenda.

The time trade-off (TTO) method is widely used to obtain quality of life scores for health states, but its validity is not uncontested, for instance because TTO values for similar health states can differ substantially between studies. This could be caused by differences between studies in how the procedure is applied, but could also relate to differences in study samples.

The increasing demand for healthcare and the resulting pressure on available budgets render priority setting inevitable. If societies aim to improve health and distribute health(care) fairly, equity-efficiency trade-offs are necessary. In the Netherlands, proportional shortfall (PS) was introduced to quantify necessity of care, allowing a direct equity-efficiency trade-off. This study describes the history and application of PS in the Netherlands and examines the theoretical and empirical support for PS as well as its current role in healthcare decision making. We reviewed the international literature on PS from 2001 onwards, along with publicly accessible meeting reports from the Dutch appraisal committee, Adviescommissie Pakket (ACP), from 2013 to 2016. Our results indicate that there is support for the decision model in which necessity is quantified and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are evaluated against associated monetary reference values. The model enables a uniform framework for priority setting across all healthcare sectors. Although consensus about the application of PS has not yet been reached and alternative ways to quantify necessity were found in ACP reports, PS has increasingly been applied in decision making since 2015. However, empirical support for PS is limited and it may insufficiently reflect societal preferences regarding age and reducing lifetime-health inequalities. Hence, further investigation into refining PS-or exploration of another approach-appears warranted for operationalising the equity-efficiency trade-off.

Background Conflicting results regarding associations of time trade-off (TTO) valuations with respondent characteristics have been reported, mostly on the basis of regression analyses. Alternative approaches, such as the latent class analysis (LCA), may add to the further understanding of variations in TTO responses. Objectives To identify whether subgroups of respondents can be identified on the basis of their responses to TTO exercises and to investigate which respondent characteristics are associated with membership of the identified subgroups. Methods Members of the Dutch general public, aged 18 to 65 years, completed a Web-based questionnaire concerning sociodemographic characteristics, three TTO exercises valuing health states described using the domains of the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire, and preference for quality versus quantity of life. LCA was used to identify patterns in the responses. Predictive variables were included in the final LCA model to identify the particular respondent characteristics that predict subgroup membership. Results The sample consisted of 1067 respondents. Four latent classes were identified in the responses to TTO exercises. Two were high traders, focusing on quality of life and trading off a relatively high number of years. The other two were low traders, focusing on length of life. Predictive analyses revealed significant differences between subgroups in terms of age, sex, subjective life expectancy, and preference for quantity over quality of life. Conclusions We showed that distinct classes of respondents can be discerned in TTO responses from the general public, distinguishing subgroups of low and high traders. More research in this area should confirm our findings and investigate their implications for health state valuation exercises.

Health care systems are challenged in allocating scarce health care resources, which are typically insufficient to fulfil all health care wants and needs. One criterion for priority setting may be the 'acceptable health' approach, which suggests that society may want to assign higher priority to health benefits in people with "unacceptable" than in people with "acceptable" health. A level of acceptable health then serves as a reference point for priority setting. Empirical research has indicated that people may be able and willing to define health states as "unacceptable" or "acceptable", but little attention has been given to the normative implications of evaluating health benefits in relation to a reference level of acceptable health. The current paper aims to address this gap by relating insights from the distributive justice literature, i.e. the sufficientarian literature, to the acceptable health approach, as we argue that these approaches are related. We specifically focus on the implications of an 'acceptability' approach for priority weighting of health benefits, derived from sufficientarian reasoning and debates, and assess the moral implications of such weighting.

Background Limited health care budgets and population aging result in a need to compare care services on their benefits and costs. Because services for older people often aim to improve multiple life aspects, valid measures are needed to examine their benefits on individuals' health and well-being simultaneously. Two measures may meet this end: the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) and the ICEpop CAPability measure for Older people (ICECAP-O). Objectives To compare the validity of both measures, the ASCOT and the ICECAP-O. Methods A sampling agency gathered cross-sectional data in May 2015. Using exploratory factor analysis, the underlying factor structure of the ASCOT and the ICECAP-O was examined for the first time. Convergent and discriminant validity in relation to health measures (five-level EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire, EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale, Barthel Index, and Geriatric Depression Scale-15) and well-being measures (Older People's Quality of Life Questionnaire-13, Satisfaction with Life Scale, and Cantril's Ladder) were tested using Spearman rank correlations and variance analysis. Results The ASCOT and the ICECAP-O tapped into a shared factor, whereas both measures also loaded on two separate factors. The ASCOT and the ICECAP-O correlated highly with the health and well-being measures, but the correlation with the physical health measure Barthel Index was moderate. Both measures discriminated between subgroups of respondents. Conclusions The ASCOT and the ICECAP-O seem promising measures to evaluate well-being among older people, whereby the ASCOT seems more specific to social care–related outcomes. The performance of both measures in other respondent groups and countries, and their relation to physical health, need to be further examined before their use in economic evaluations can be recommended.

Objectives Recent debates in the Netherlands on health care priority setting have focused on the relative value of gains generated by life-extending medicines for people with a terminal illness, mostly new cancer drugs. These treatments are generally expensive, provide relatively small health gains, and therefore usually do not meet common cost per QALY thresholds. Nevertheless, these drugs may be provided under the assumption that there is public support for making a special case for treatments for people with a terminal illness. This study investigated the views of the public in the Netherlands on a range of equity and efficiency considerations relevant to priority setting and examines whether there is public support for making such a special case. Methods Using Q methodology, three viewpoints on important principles for priority setting were identified. Data were collected through ranking exercises conducted by 46 members of the general public in the Netherlands, including 11 respondents with personal experience with cancer. Results Viewpoint 1 emphasized that people have equal rights to healthcare and opposed priority setting on any ground. Viewpoint 2 emphasized that the care for terminal patients should at all times respect the patients' quality of life, which sometimes means refraining from invasive treatments. Viewpoint 3 had a strong focus on effective and efficient care and had no moral objection against priority setting under certain circumstances. Conclusions Overall, we found little public support for the assumption that health gains in terminally ill patients are more valuable than those in other patients. This implies that the assumption that society is prepared to pay more for health gains in people who have only a short period of lifetime left does not correspond with societal preferences in the Netherlands.

Common health state valuation methodologies, such as standard gamble (SG) and time trade‐off (TTO), typically produce different weights for identical health states. We attempt to alleviate these differences by correcting the confounding influences modeled in prospect theory: loss aversion and probability weighting. Furthermore, we correct for nonlinear utility of life duration. In contrast to earlier attempts at correcting TTO and SG weights, we measure and correct all these tenets simultaneously, using newly developed nonparametric methodology. These corrections were applied to three less‐than‐perfect health states, measured with TTO and SG. We found considerable loss aversion and probability weighting for both gains and losses in life years, and we observe concave utility for gains and convex utility for losses in life years. After correction, the initially significant differences in weights between TTO and SG disappeared for all health states. Our findings suggest new opportunities to account for bias in health state valuations but also the need for further validation of resulting weights.

New medical technologies that prolong life result in additional health care use in life years gained. Some of these costs in life years gained are considered to be related to the intervention while other costs are considered unrelated. Here, we argue that ignoring these so-called future medical costs in cost effectiveness analysis is contrary to common sense, results in lost health and fails to inform decision makers for whom cost effectiveness is supposed to serve.

In this editorial, we consider the vexing issue of 'unrelated future costs' (for example, the costs of caring for people with dementia or kidney failure after preventing their deaths from a heart attack). The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance is not to take such costs into account in technology appraisals. However, standard appraisal practice involves modelling the benefits of those unrelated technologies. We argue that there is a sound principled reason for including both the costs and benefits of unrelated care. Changing this practice would have material consequences for decisions about reimbursing particular technologies, and we urge future research to understand this better. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Productivity costs can strongly impact cost-effectiveness outcomes. This study investigated the impact in the context of expensive hospital drugs. This study aimed to: (1) investigate the effect of productivity costs on cost-effectiveness outcomes, (2) determine whether economic evaluations of expensive drugs commonly include productivity costs related to paid and unpaid work, and (3) explore potential reasons for excluding productivity costs from the economic evaluation. We conducted a systematic literature review to identify economic evaluations of 33 expensive drugs. We analysed whether evaluations included productivity costs and whether inclusion or exclusion was related to the study population’s age, health and national health economic guidelines. The impact on cost-effectiveness outcomes was assessed in studies that included productivity costs. Of 249 identified economic evaluations of expensive drugs, 22 (9 %) included productivity costs related to paid work. One study included unpaid productivity. Mostly, productivity cost exclusion could not be explained by the study population’s age and health status, but national guidelines appeared influential. Productivity costs proved often highly influential. This study indicates that productivity costs in economic evaluations of expensive hospital drugs are commonly and inconsistently ignored in economic evaluations. This warrants caution in interpreting and comparing the results of these evaluations. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10198-015-0685-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Many countries have national guidelines for performing economic evaluations in healthcare.1 These guidelines should ensure the comparability and quality of such evaluations, which should facilitate making well informed policy decisions regarding reimbursement of interventions. Given the developments in both the methodology and policy context of economic evaluation of healthcare interventions, these guidelines require periodical revision. Recently, the Dutch National Health Care Institute issued new guidance for economic evaluations in healthcare [1]. The new guidelines update and replace three separately published previous guidelines: those for pharmacoeconomic evaluation (latest version 2006), outcomes research (latest version 2008) as well as the Dutch costing manual (latest version 2010). In this editorial, we highlight the distinguishing features of the new Dutch guidelines. Moreover, we highlight which developments, in our opinion, are desirable in coming updates, but are still in development or controversial.

Including societal preferences in allocation decisions is an important challenge for the health care sector. Here, we present results of a phased discrete choice experiment investigating the impact of various attributes on respondents’ preferences for distribution of health and health care. In addition to the renowned equity principles severity of illness (operationalized as initial health) and fair innings (operationalized as age), some characteristics of beneficiaries (culpability and having dependents) and the disease (rarity) were included in the choice experiment. We used a nested logit model to analyse the data. We found that all selected attributes significantly influenced respondents’ choices. The phased inclusion showed that additional attributes affected respondents’ preferences for previously-included attributes and reduced unobserved variance. Although not all these attributes may be considered relevant for decision making from a normative perspective, including them in choice experiments contributes to our understanding of societal preferences for each single attribute. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Whether respondents incorporate altruistic preferences in time tradeoff (TTO) exercises remains understudied. We present an extended quality-adjusted life-year model incorporating altruism. We derive that altruism may affect TTO values in 2 directions. First, “longevity altruists” may wish to prolong life for the sake of their loved ones (to avoid being missed). Second, “quality-of-life altruists” may have a preference to avoid bad health states resulting in being a burden to loved ones. The existence and influence of these preferences in a TTO were empirically confirmed in a sample of 1690 respondents from the general public. We classified respondents as “longevity altruists” or “quality-of-life altruists” based on their reasoning behind inclusion of loved ones in their TTO responses. In line with expectations, longevity altruists traded fewer years than quality-of-life altruists. Nonaltruists gave intermediate values.

There has been considerable debate on the extent to which future costs should be included in cost-effectiveness analyses of health technologies. In this article, we summarize the theoretical debates and empirical research in this area and highlight the conclusions that can be drawn for current practice. For future related and future unrelated medical costs, the literature suggests that inclusion is required to obtain optimal outcomes from available resources. This conclusion does not depend on the perspective adopted by the decision maker. Future non-medical costs are only relevant when adopting a societal perspective; these should be included if the benefits of non-medical consumption and production are also included in the evaluation. Whether this is the case currently remains unclear, given that benefits are typically quantified in quality-adjusted life-years and only limited research has been performed on the extent to which these (implicitly) capture benefits beyond health. Empirical research has shown that the impact of including future costs can be large, and that estimation of such costs is feasible. In practice, however, future unrelated medical costs and future unrelated non-medical consumption costs are typically excluded from economic evaluations. This is explicitly prescribed in some pharmacoeconomic guidelines. Further research is warranted on the development and improvement of methods for the estimation of future costs. Standardization of methods is needed to enhance the practical applicability of inclusion for the analyst and the comparability of the outcomes of different studies. For future non-medical costs, further research is also needed on the extent to which benefits related to this spending are captured in the measurement and valuation of health benefits, and how to broaden the scope of the evaluation if they are not sufficiently captured.

Evidence has accumulated documenting loss aversion for monetary and, recently, for health outcomes—meaning that, generally, losses carry more weight than equally sized gains. In the conventional Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) models, which comprise utility for quality and length of life, loss aversion is not taken into account. When measuring elements of the QALY model, commonly, the (implicit) assumption is that utility for length and quality of life are independent. First attempts to quantify loss aversion for QALYs typically measured loss aversion in the context of life duration, keeping quality of life constant (or vice versa). However, given that QALYs are multi-attribute utilities, it may be possible that the degree of loss aversion is dependent on, or inseparable from, quality of life and non-constant. We test this assumption using non-parametric methodology to quantify loss aversion, under different levels of quality of life. We measure utility of life duration for four health states within subjects, and present the results of a robustness test of loss aversion within the QALY model. We find loss aversion coefficients to be stable at the aggregate level, albeit with considerable heterogeneity at the individual level. Implications for applied work on prospect theory within health economics are discussed.