<p>One must consider cost effectiveness when deciding how resources within the health sector should be distributed. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) are used to measure the value of different medical treatments. QALY is based on utility maximization theory, which suggests that a QALY is always a QALY regardless of who receives it. Therefore, a produced QALY is worth the same regardless of the age or the initial health of the patient. Previous research has shown that these assumptions do not seem to fit the real preferences of individuals. Further, there are different methods of acquiring QALYs that give different outcomes. Two of these methods are Time Trade Off (TTO), in which respondents are confronted with a valuation of health change in time, and Person Trade Off (PTO), where respondents are confronted with a valuation in persons. Arguably, PTO is the preferred method that takes greater account of how individuals wish to allocate the resources of the society. From a distribution perspective focusing on age and initial health status, this paper aims to empirically identify the differences between TTO and PTO considering the measurement of preferences for life quality. The aim is also to examine whether the results obtained are consistent with the theoretical assumptions that are required for the preference to be accepted as a cardinal utility. A quantitative survey was carried out with 58 medical and 61 economics students. Half of the students received PTO and the other half TTO questions. The data collected was analyzed comparing the methods, the two student groups and men against women.</p><p>The results from the survey show that, both with TTO and PTO, respondents on average believe that patients who are at a lower initial health level should be given priority over patients who are at a higher initial health level, and younger patients should be given priority over older patients. No significant differences were seen between PTO and TTO when it came to the age of the patient. Conversely, there was a significant difference between the methods for the valuation based on initial health status of patients. Measured with PTO a treatment for patients who are at a lower initial level is valued 28% higher than a treatment for those patients who are at a higher initial level, while the corresponding figure for TTO was 8%. Between medical students and economic students, there were significant differences in the question of age in the PTO. Between men and women differences were found in both methods.</p> / <p>Kostnadseffektivitet är en av faktorerna som ska tas i beaktande vid beslut om hur resurser inom hälso- och sjukvården ska fördelas. Kvalitetsjusterade levnadsår (QALY) används för att mäta effekten av olika insatser. Måttet baseras på nyttomaximeringsteori vilket leder till att en QALY alltid är en QALY oavsett vem den tillfaller - med andra ord är en QALY som produceras hos en patient lika mycket värd oavsett exempelvis patientens ålder eller initiala tillstånd. Dessa antaganden har i tidigare undersökningar visat sig stämma dåligt med individers preferenser men olika metoder för att ta fram QALY verkar ta olika mycket hänsyn till dem. Två av flera metoder är Time Trade Off (TTO), där respondenter ställs inför en värdering av hälsoförändringar i tid och Person Trade Off (PTO) där respondenter ställs inför en värdering i personer. PTO har påståtts vara en mer rättvisande metod som tar större hänsyn till hur individer vill att samhälleliga resurser ska fördelas. Denna uppsats syftar till att, utifrån ett fördelningsperspektiv med fokus på ålder och initialt hälsotillstånd, empiriskt kartlägga förekomsten av skillnader i preferenser för livskvalitet mätt med PTO respektive TTO, samt att undersöka om de erhållna resultaten överensstämmer med de teoretiska grundantagandena som krävs för att preferenser ska accepteras som kardinala nyttor. För att svara mot syftet utfördes en kvantitativ undersökning på 58 läkar- samt 61 ekonomistudenter. Hälften av studenterna fick PTO-frågor och den andra hälften TTO-frågor. En statistisk bearbetning av insamlad data har gjorts där svaren har jämförts mellan metoderna samt mellan läkar- och ekonomistudenter och kvinnor och män.</p><p>Resultaten från undersökningen visar att både med TTO och PTO anser respondenterna att patienter som befinner sig på en lägre initial nivå ska prioriteras framför patienter som befinner sig på en högre initial nivå samt yngre patienter ska prioriteras framför äldre patienter. Vad gäller hänsyn till patienters ålder uppmättes inga signifikanta skillnader mellan PTO och TTO. Däremot uppmättes en signifikant skillnad mellan metoderna vad gäller hänsyn till initialt hälsotillstånd hos patienter. Mätt med PTO värderas en behandling för de patienter som befinner sig på en lägre initial nivå 28 % högre än en behandling för de patienter som befinner sig på en högre initial nivå medan motsvarande siffra för TTO var 8%. Mellan läkare och ekonomer fanns signifikanta skillnader i frågan gällande ålder i PTO och mellan kvinnor och män återfanns skillnader i båda metoder.</p>

One must consider cost effectiveness when deciding how resources within the health sector should be distributed. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) are used to measure the value of different medical treatments. QALY is based on utility maximization theory, which suggests that a QALY is always a QALY regardless of who receives it. Therefore, a produced QALY is worth the same regardless of the age or the initial health of the patient. Previous research has shown that these assumptions do not seem to fit the real preferences of individuals. Further, there are different methods of acquiring QALYs that give different outcomes. Two of these methods are Time Trade Off (TTO), in which respondents are confronted with a valuation of health change in time, and Person Trade Off (PTO), where respondents are confronted with a valuation in persons. Arguably, PTO is the preferred method that takes greater account of how individuals wish to allocate the resources of the society. From a distribution perspective focusing on age and initial health status, this paper aims to empirically identify the differences between TTO and PTO considering the measurement of preferences for life quality. The aim is also to examine whether the results obtained are consistent with the theoretical assumptions that are required for the preference to be accepted as a cardinal utility. A quantitative survey was carried out with 58 medical and 61 economics students. Half of the students received PTO and the other half TTO questions. The data collected was analyzed comparing the methods, the two student groups and men against women. The results from the survey show that, both with TTO and PTO, respondents on average believe that patients who are at a lower initial health level should be given priority over patients who are at a higher initial health level, and younger patients should be given priority over older patients. No significant differences were seen between PTO and TTO when it came to the age of the patient. Conversely, there was a significant difference between the methods for the valuation based on initial health status of patients. Measured with PTO a treatment for patients who are at a lower initial level is valued 28% higher than a treatment for those patients who are at a higher initial level, while the corresponding figure for TTO was 8%. Between medical students and economic students, there were significant differences in the question of age in the PTO. Between men and women differences were found in both methods. / Kostnadseffektivitet är en av faktorerna som ska tas i beaktande vid beslut om hur resurser inom hälso- och sjukvården ska fördelas. Kvalitetsjusterade levnadsår (QALY) används för att mäta effekten av olika insatser. Måttet baseras på nyttomaximeringsteori vilket leder till att en QALY alltid är en QALY oavsett vem den tillfaller - med andra ord är en QALY som produceras hos en patient lika mycket värd oavsett exempelvis patientens ålder eller initiala tillstånd. Dessa antaganden har i tidigare undersökningar visat sig stämma dåligt med individers preferenser men olika metoder för att ta fram QALY verkar ta olika mycket hänsyn till dem. Två av flera metoder är Time Trade Off (TTO), där respondenter ställs inför en värdering av hälsoförändringar i tid och Person Trade Off (PTO) där respondenter ställs inför en värdering i personer. PTO har påståtts vara en mer rättvisande metod som tar större hänsyn till hur individer vill att samhälleliga resurser ska fördelas. Denna uppsats syftar till att, utifrån ett fördelningsperspektiv med fokus på ålder och initialt hälsotillstånd, empiriskt kartlägga förekomsten av skillnader i preferenser för livskvalitet mätt med PTO respektive TTO, samt att undersöka om de erhållna resultaten överensstämmer med de teoretiska grundantagandena som krävs för att preferenser ska accepteras som kardinala nyttor. För att svara mot syftet utfördes en kvantitativ undersökning på 58 läkar- samt 61 ekonomistudenter. Hälften av studenterna fick PTO-frågor och den andra hälften TTO-frågor. En statistisk bearbetning av insamlad data har gjorts där svaren har jämförts mellan metoderna samt mellan läkar- och ekonomistudenter och kvinnor och män. Resultaten från undersökningen visar att både med TTO och PTO anser respondenterna att patienter som befinner sig på en lägre initial nivå ska prioriteras framför patienter som befinner sig på en högre initial nivå samt yngre patienter ska prioriteras framför äldre patienter. Vad gäller hänsyn till patienters ålder uppmättes inga signifikanta skillnader mellan PTO och TTO. Däremot uppmättes en signifikant skillnad mellan metoderna vad gäller hänsyn till initialt hälsotillstånd hos patienter. Mätt med PTO värderas en behandling för de patienter som befinner sig på en lägre initial nivå 28 % högre än en behandling för de patienter som befinner sig på en högre initial nivå medan motsvarande siffra för TTO var 8%. Mellan läkare och ekonomer fanns signifikanta skillnader i frågan gällande ålder i PTO och mellan kvinnor och män återfanns skillnader i båda metoder.

Thesis (MPhil (Philosophy))--University of Stellenbosch, 2006. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Every individual has a mental image of what a ‘good’ life entails. Whether this idea of a good life is based on hedonist, preference satisfaction or ideal theories, or a combination of these theories, it forms the underlying framework that indicates and measures how well or how poorly we are doing. The smaller the discrepancy between these suppositions we nurture and our real circumstances, the greater the degree of wellbeing and satisfaction we experience. This satisfaction with our lives can be indicated on objective and subjective scales, and these serve as a direct reflection of our quality of life. In addition to self experienced quality of life, quality of life is also seen as the aim of health care. However, as the World Health Organization (WHO) sketches an almost utopian view of health, the field is deemed to be so wide that it includes man in his totality. This state of total psychological, physical and social welfare is further seen as a primary or basic necessity to which everyone is entitled. Human welfare, or quality of life, viewed from a healthcare perspective, serves as the criterion for substantiating, informing and guiding health care. Not only are choices regarding the type and degree of intervention in the therapeutic situation guided by this, but quality of life is also regarded as the single cut-off point for determining whether continued existence would be better or worse than not existing at all. A further outcome of quality of life is the use of QALYs (quality-adjusted life years) and TTO (Time trade-off). These instruments are designed to determine the net efficiency of therapeutic intervention by combining two dimensions, namely quality and quantity of life. Quality of life and [healthy] lifespan are therefore combined in a single framework of value assessment, and this framework is applied as the main criterion for allocating limited resources. This application of quality of life has been adjusted to serve as the main measure for determining the value of a life. In this study quality of life will critically be investigated with the focus on self experienced quality of life; quality of life as the aim of health care; and quality of life as the determining factor to place a value on a human life. The study indicates that the concept of quality of life had to undergo a natural and unavoidable development and expansion to keep pace with the changed medical ethos of our times. The writer indicates that the transformation of quality of life as the aim of healthcare to quality of life as the factor for determining the value of a life is currently ethically unacceptable in its application. Finally, a more acceptable development that includes referred competition and social responsibility is suggested.

<p>The aim with this thesis was to study cardiovascular disease and hypertension, use of drugs and health from an epidemiological perspective. Various methods - self-rated health (SRH), health related quality of life (HRQL) - the 36-item short form questionnaire (SF-36) - and health utility measurements - the rating scale (RS) and the time-trade off (TTO) methods - were employed.</p><p>Data from the Swedish Adoption/Twin Study of Aging (SATSA) in 1984, 1987, 1990, and 1993 as well as a general population survey conducted in Uppsala County in 1995 were used.</p><p>Persons who have cardiovascular disease, both with and without drug treatment, were found to have a lower SRH as compared to others in the population. Longitudinal analyses showed that SRH was relatively stable over time among persons with cardiovascular disease. Both having a low SRH and having cardiovascular disease were associated with a higher mortality rate.</p><p>Hypertensives were found to have a lower HRQL than do others in the general population as measured by the SF-36. The lowest scoring was found in the general health perception scale (GH), whereas role emotional (RE) and mental health (MH) were the scales least affected by hypertension.</p><p>Nearly 20 percent of the antihypertensive drug users reported side effects.The pattern of side effects was similar to that reported in clinical trials. Both hypertension itself and the drug treatment were found to have an impact on the patient's health-state utility as measured by the RS. Comparative analyses showed that health utilities and psychometric quality-of-life instruments were only moderately correlated among hypertensives. </p><p>The results also showed that inequalities in HRQL were present with respect to several sociodemographic factors. </p><p>In summary, this thesis revealed that persons with cardiovascular disease and/or with hypertension experience poorer health than others in the population. The poor health may be caused both by the disease and/or the drug treatment. The results in this thesis also suggested that special attention and care should be directed to persons with cardiovascular disease and/or hypertension reporting ill health. This especially is important given that low HRQL can be a riskfactor for subsequent cardiovascular events or complications which in turn might result in higher mortality rate.</p>

The aim with this thesis was to study cardiovascular disease and hypertension, use of drugs and health from an epidemiological perspective. Various methods - self-rated health (SRH), health related quality of life (HRQL) - the 36-item short form questionnaire (SF-36) - and health utility measurements - the rating scale (RS) and the time-trade off (TTO) methods - were employed. Data from the Swedish Adoption/Twin Study of Aging (SATSA) in 1984, 1987, 1990, and 1993 as well as a general population survey conducted in Uppsala County in 1995 were used. Persons who have cardiovascular disease, both with and without drug treatment, were found to have a lower SRH as compared to others in the population. Longitudinal analyses showed that SRH was relatively stable over time among persons with cardiovascular disease. Both having a low SRH and having cardiovascular disease were associated with a higher mortality rate. Hypertensives were found to have a lower HRQL than do others in the general population as measured by the SF-36. The lowest scoring was found in the general health perception scale (GH), whereas role emotional (RE) and mental health (MH) were the scales least affected by hypertension. Nearly 20 percent of the antihypertensive drug users reported side effects.The pattern of side effects was similar to that reported in clinical trials. Both hypertension itself and the drug treatment were found to have an impact on the patient's health-state utility as measured by the RS. Comparative analyses showed that health utilities and psychometric quality-of-life instruments were only moderately correlated among hypertensives. The results also showed that inequalities in HRQL were present with respect to several sociodemographic factors. In summary, this thesis revealed that persons with cardiovascular disease and/or with hypertension experience poorer health than others in the population. The poor health may be caused both by the disease and/or the drug treatment. The results in this thesis also suggested that special attention and care should be directed to persons with cardiovascular disease and/or hypertension reporting ill health. This especially is important given that low HRQL can be a riskfactor for subsequent cardiovascular events or complications which in turn might result in higher mortality rate.

Background Chronic low back pain (LBP) is a common health problem, with a large potential for primary prevention. Health utilities (HU) reflect which proportion of their expected remaining life time individuals would hypothetically trade to be alleviated of a health condition of interest. A value of 0 means “prefer to die immediately”, a value of 1 means “not willing to trade any life time”. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to assess HU for LBP patients and for healthy participants and to examine whether HU for LBP are useful indicators to substantiate preventive and therapeutic decision making. Methods Healthy participants (n = 126) and LBP patients (n = 32) were recruited mainly among the employees of a tertiary care hospital in Germany. Standardized LBP scenarios were presented to all participants and HU values were assessed using the time-trade-off method. Results Median HU for LBP were 0.90 (IQR 0.31) for participants and 0.93 (IQR 0.10) for LBP patients. Measurements were consistent across illness severity ratings with HU and with a visual analogue scale (VAS); in the healthy sample the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.61 (95% CI 0.23–1.00, F(1125) = 190, p < .001), in the patient sample the ICC was 0.66 (95% CI = 0.24–1.00, F(1,31) = 62, p < .001). 8% of participants reported HU of 1. There was no statistically significant relation between HU and age, income, or gender. Conclusion On average, participants chose a 7 to 10% shorter life expectancy to avoid LBP, but almost 1 in 10 participants were not willing to trade any life years. The results indicate a certain stability of HU due to the comparability of HU ratings across patients and healthy participants, the measurement consistency when comparing VAS and HU ratings, and the lack of association between demographic variables and HU. This underlines the usefulness of HU for measuring illness severity in comparative health economics evaluations of preventive and therapeutic measures that address chronic LBP or other pain-characterized diseases. Future studies should focus on different LBP intensities and derive stratified HU that reflect the distribution of pain intensity in the population.

Background Chronic low back pain (LBP) is a common health problem, with a large potential for primary prevention. Health utilities (HU) reflect which proportion of their expected remaining life time individuals would hypothetically trade to be alleviated of a health condition of interest. A value of 0 means “prefer to die immediately”, a value of 1 means “not willing to trade any life time”. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to assess HU for LBP patients and for healthy participants and to examine whether HU for LBP are useful indicators to substantiate preventive and therapeutic decision making. Methods Healthy participants (n = 126) and LBP patients (n = 32) were recruited mainly among the employees of a tertiary care hospital in Germany. Standardized LBP scenarios were presented to all participants and HU values were assessed using the time-trade-off method. Results Median HU for LBP were 0.90 (IQR 0.31) for participants and 0.93 (IQR 0.10) for LBP patients. Measurements were consistent across illness severity ratings with HU and with a visual analogue scale (VAS); in the healthy sample the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.61 (95% CI 0.23–1.00, F(1125) = 190, p < .001), in the patient sample the ICC was 0.66 (95% CI = 0.24–1.00, F(1,31) = 62, p < .001). 8% of participants reported HU of 1. There was no statistically significant relation between HU and age, income, or gender. Conclusion On average, participants chose a 7 to 10% shorter life expectancy to avoid LBP, but almost 1 in 10 participants were not willing to trade any life years. The results indicate a certain stability of HU due to the comparability of HU ratings across patients and healthy participants, the measurement consistency when comparing VAS and HU ratings, and the lack of association between demographic variables and HU. This underlines the usefulness of HU for measuring illness severity in comparative health economics evaluations of preventive and therapeutic measures that address chronic LBP or other pain-characterized diseases. Future studies should focus on different LBP intensities and derive stratified HU that reflect the distribution of pain intensity in the population.