Search

Purpose: The most widely used generic questionnaire to estimate the quality of life for yielding quality-adjusted life years in economic evaluations is EQ-5D. Country-specific population value sets are required to use EQ-5D in economic evaluations. The aim of this study was to establish an EQ-5D-3L value set for Russia., Methods: A representative sample aged 18+ years was recruited from the Russia`s general population. Computer-assisted face-to-face interviews were conducted based on the standardized valuation protocol using EQ-Portable Valuation Technology. Population preferences were elicited utilizing both composite time trade-off (cTTO) and discrete choice experiment (DCE) techniques. To estimate the value set, a hybrid regression model combining cTTO and DCE data was used., Results: A total of 300 respondents who successfully completed the interview were included in the primary analysis. 120 (40.0%) respondents reported no health problems of any dimension, and 56 (18.7%) reported moderate health problems in one dimension of the EQ-5D-3L. Median self-rated health using EQ-VAS was 80 with IQR 70-90. Comparing cTTO and DCE-predicted values for 243 health states resulted in a similar pattern. This supports the use of hybrid models. The predicted value based on the preferred model for the worst health state "33333" was -0.503. Mobility dimension had the most significant impact on the utility decrement, and anxiety/depression had the lowest decrement., Conclusion: Determining a Russian national value set may be considered the first step towards promoting cost-utility analysis use to increase comparability among studies and improve the transferability of healthcare decision-making in Russia.

Introduction: Studies reporting on the cost-effectiveness of cancer screening usually account for quality of life losses and healthcare costs owing to cancer but do not account for future costs and quality of life losses related to competing risks. This study aims to demonstrate the impact of medical costs and quality of life losses of other diseases in the life years gained on the cost-effectiveness of U.S. cancer screening., Methods: Cost-effectiveness studies of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening in the U.S. were identified using a systematic literature review. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of the eligible articles were updated by adding lifetime expenditures and health losses per quality-adjusted life year gained because of competing risks. This was accomplished using data on medical spending and quality of life by age and disease from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2011-2015) combined with cause-deleted life tables. The study was conducted in 2018., Results: The impact of quality of life losses and healthcare expenditures of competing risks in life years gained incurred owing to screening were the highest for breast cancer and the lowest for cervical cancer. The updates suggest that incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are underestimated by $10,300-$13,700 per quality-adjusted life year gained if quality of life losses and healthcare expenditures of competing risks are omitted in economic evaluations. Furthermore, cancer screening programs that were considered cost saving, were found not to be so following the inclusion of medical expenditures of competing risks., Conclusions: Practical difficulties in quantifying quality of life losses and healthcare expenditures owing to competing risks in life years gained can be overcome. Their inclusion can have a substantial impact on the cost-effectiveness of cancer screening programs., (Copyright © 2019 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Around 60% of term labours in the UK are continuously monitored using cardiotocography (CTG) to guide clinical labour management. Interpreting the CTG trace is challenging, leading to some babies suffering adverse outcomes and others unnecessary expedited deliveries. A new data driven computerised tool combining multiple clinical risk factors with CTG data (attentive CTG) was developed to help identify term babies at risk of severe compromise during labour. This paper presents an early health economic model exploring its potential cost-effectiveness. Methods: The model compared attentive CTG and usual care with usual care alone and simulated clinical events, healthcare costs, and infant quality-adjusted life years over 18 years. It was populated using data from a cohort of term pregnancies, the literature, and administrative datasets. Attentive CTG effectiveness was projected through improved monitoring sensitivity/specificity and potential reductions in numbers of severely compromised infants. Scenario analyses explored the impact of including litigation costs. Results: Nationally, attentive CTG could potentially avoid 10,000 unnecessary alerts in labour and 2400 emergency C-section deliveries through improved specificity. A reduction of 21 intrapartum stillbirths amongst severely compromised infants was also predicted with improved sensitivity. Attentive CTG could potentially lead to cost savings and health gains with a probability of being cost-effective at £25,000 per QALY ranging from 70 to 95%. Potential exists for further cost savings if litigation costs are included. Conclusions: Attentive CTG could offer a cost-effective use of healthcare resources. Prospective patient-level studies are needed to formally evaluate its effectiveness and economic impact in routine clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]