Nathalie Eckard

Differences between hypothetical and experience-based value sets for EQ-5D used in Sweden: Implications for decision makers.

Aims: A number of value sets are available today for converting EQ-5D questionnaire responses to quality-adjusted life year-weights used in health economic evaluations. The aim of this study is to analyse the differences between the commonly used hypothetical UK value set and the newly introduced Swedish experience-based value set and to evaluate health economic implications of such differences on policy decisions. Methods: Differences between the two value sets were studied using two methods: a comparison of health states and improvements as well as an empirical comparison. In the comparison of health states and improvements, the valuations of all EQ-5D states and all pure improvements were compared. In the empirical study, a database of 23,925 individuals was used to identify patient groups that could be affected by the implementation of the Swedish experience-based value set. Results: The comparison of health states and possible improvements showed that only three health states were assigned a lower quality-adjusted life year-weight and most improvements were given smaller absolute values if the experience-based value set was used. The empirical comparison showed that severe conditions were assigned higher values when using the experience-based value set. Conclusions: The Swedish experience-based value set seems to render a higher estimated level of health-related quality of life in virtually all health conditions compared to the hypothetical UK value set. In extension, health-related quality of life enhancing interventions are likely to be given higher priority in decision-making situations where hypothetical values are used to construct quality-adjusted life year-weights. In situations where experience-based quality-adjusted life year-weights are used, life-prolonging interventions would be prioritised.

Use of cost-effectiveness data in priority setting decisions: experiences from the national guidelines for heart diseases in Sweden

BACKGROUND The inclusion of cost-effectiveness data, as a basis for priority setting rankings, is a distinguishing feature in the formulation of the Swedish national guidelines. Guidelines are generated with the direct intent to influence health policy and support decisions about the efficient allocation of scarce healthcare resources. Certain medical conditions may be given higher priority rankings i.e. given more resources than others, depending on how serious the medical condition is. This study investigated how a decision-making group, the Priority Setting Group (PSG), used cost-effectiveness data in ranking priority setting decisions in the national guidelines for heart diseases. METHODS A qualitative case study methodology was used to explore the use of such data in ranking priority setting healthcare decisions. The study addressed availability of cost-effectiveness data, evidence understanding, interpretation difficulties, and the reliance on evidence. We were also interested in the explicit use of data in ranking decisions, especially in situations where economic arguments impacted the reasoning behind the decisions. RESULTS This study showed that cost-effectiveness data was an important and integrated part of the decision-making process. Involvement of a health economist and reliance on the data facilitated the use of cost-effectiveness data. Economic arguments were used both as a fine-tuning instrument and a counterweight for dichotomization. Cost-effectiveness data were used when the overall evidence base was weak and the decision-makers had trouble making decisions due to lack of clinical evidence and in times of uncertainty. Cost-effectiveness data were also used for decisions on the introduction of new expensive medical technologies. CONCLUSION Cost-effectiveness data matters in decision-making processes and the results of this study could be applicable to other jurisdictions where health economics is implemented in decision-making. This study contributes to knowledge on how cost-effectiveness data is used in actual decision-making, to ensure that the decisions are offered on equal terms and that patients receive medical care according their needs in order achieve maximum benefit.

A case of community-based fall prevention: Survey of organization and content of minor home help services in Swedish municipalities

Background: The aim of this study was to survey minor home help services provided by Swedish municipalities with the main purpose to prevent fall injuries. Methods: If minor home help services were presented on the homepage of a municipality, an initial telephone contact was taken. Thereafter a questionnaire was administered, including questions about target groups, aim with the services, tasks included, costs and restrictions for users, budget, and experienced gains with the services. Municipalities not providing minor home help services were asked about the reason therefore and if the municipality had previously provided the services Results: The questionnaire response rate was 92%. In 191 of Sweden’s 290 municipalities services were provided by, or in cooperation with, the municipality. Reasons for not providing the services were mainly financial and lack of demand. Services were more often provided in larger cities and in municipalities located in populous regions. In some municipalities services were performed by persons with functional disabilities or unemployed persons. Conclusions: Both providers and users expressed satisfaction with the services. Aspects expressed were that services lead to greater sense of safety and social gains. The effect of the services in terms of fall prevention is yet to be proved. With only a small fall-preventive effect services are probably cost-effective. Improved quality of life, sense of safety, and being able to offer meaningful work to otherwise unemployed persons are important aspects that might in themselves motivate the provision of minor home help services.

Compilation of cost-effectiveness evidence for different heart conditions and treatment strategies

Abstract Objectives. Despite the continuing interest in health economic research, we could find no accessible data set on cost-effectiveness, useful as practical information to decision makers who must allocate scarce resources within the cardiovascular field. The aim of this paper was to present cost-effectiveness ratios, based on a systematic literature search for the treatment of heart diseases. Design. A comprehensive literature search on cost-effectiveness analyses of intervention strategies for the treatment of heart diseases was conducted. We compiled available cost-effectiveness ratios for different heart conditions and treatment strategies, in a cost-effectiveness ranking table. The cost-effectiveness ratios were expressed as a cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) or life year gained. Results. Cost-effectiveness ratios, ranging from dominant to those costing more than 1,000,000 Euros per QALY gained, and bibliographic references are provided for. The table was categorized according to disease group, making the ranking table readily available. Conclusions. Cost-effectiveness ranking tables provide a means of presenting cost-effectiveness evidence. They provide valid information within a limited space aiding decision makers on the allocation of health care resources. This paper represents an extensive compilation of health economic evidence for the treatment of heart diseases.

Including Both Costs and Effects – The Challenge of Using Cost-Effectiveness Data in National-Level Policy-Making: A Response to Recent Commentaries

Incorporating cost-effectiveness data in the priority-setting decisions is a distinguishing feature in the Swedish national guidelines. This differentiates the Swedish guidelines from its European and American counterparts. The broader perspective is aimed at facilitating explicit resource allocations and priority-setting in healthcare, all in accordance with the three guiding ethical principles stated in the Health and Medical Services Act.1 The guidelines consist of recommendations in the form of a priority-setting decisions produced by a Priority-Setting Group (PSG) and the work process involves appraising the evidence used as decision support (including cost-effectiveness).