New HEDS Discussion Paper – Applying EuroQol Portable Valuation Technology to the EQ Health and Wellbeing Short (EQHWB-S) : a pilot study. Report.

from Health Economics and Decision Science Blog @ ScHARR at https://bit.ly/3pvUmHS on December 7, 2021 at 09:06AM


Mukuria, C, Peasgood, T. and Brazier, J. (2021) Applying EuroQol Portable Valuation Technology to the EQ Health and Wellbeing Short (EQHWB-S) : a pilot study. Report. ScHARR HEDS Discussion Papers . School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield



Image of HEDS Discussion Paper
HEDS Discussion Paper


Abstract

OBJECTIVES:The aim was to assess whether existing valuation methods were suitable for the nine item EQ Health and Wellbeing ShortTM (EQ‐HWB‐S).

METHODS: EuroQol Portable Valuation Technology (EQ‐PVT) which uses composite time trade‐off (cTTO) and discrete choice experiments (DCE) was modified for the EQ‐HWB‐STM. Volunteer non‐ academic University of Sheffield staff were recruited. A mixed methods approach involving qualitative interviews and assessment of quantitative data was used to assess the applicability and feasibility of EQ‐PVT to EQ‐HWB‐S. Participants valued six states using cTTO (three EQ‐HWB‐S and three EQ‐5D‐ 5LTM) and four EQ‐HWB‐S states using DCE.

RESULTS: Nineteen participants with mean (SD) age 48.2 (13.0) were interviewed. Mean TTO values were ordered as expected with higher mean values for the mild EQ‐HWB state compared to the moderate and severe states. Most participants found it fairly or very easy to understand cTTO questions for both EQ‐HWB‐S 94.7% (18/19) and EQ‐5D 89.5% (17/19). Pain, activities and depression were considered key drivers for respondents’ choices. Additional information in the EQ‐HWB‐S was useful in helping to imagine what life would be like but it could also be overwhelming and make the tasks difficult. ‘Coping’ was a problematic item as it was either used as an overall assessment of the state or ignored in favour of participants’ perceived ability to cope with the state. ‘Coping’ was replaced with ‘control’ which did not have the same problems. Participants generally preferred DCE to TTO. DCE presentations with overlap but with simple formatting were preferred.

CONCLUSIONS: A modified standardised valuation has been successfully applied to health and wellbeing states defined by the EQ‐HWB‐S. A full feasibility study is now required.