Disability Adjusted Life Years and minimal disease: application of a preference-based relevance criterion to rank enteric pathogens

BackgroundBurden of disease estimates, which combine mortality and morbidity into a single measure, are used increasingly for priority setting in disease control, prevention and surveillance. However, because there is no clear exclusion criterion for highly prevalent minimal disease in burden of disease studies its application may be restricted. The aim of this study was to apply a newly developed relevance criterion based on preferences of a population panel, and to compare burden of disease estimates of five foodborne pathogens calculated with and without application of this criterion.MethodsPreferences for twenty health states associated with foodborne disease were obtained from a population panel (n = 107) with the Visual Analogue Scale and the Time Trade-off (TTO) technique. The TTO preferences were used to derive the relevance criterion: if at least 50% of a panel of judges is willing to trade-off time in order to be restored to full health the health state is regarded as relevant, i.e. TTO median is greater than 0. Subsequently, the burden of disease of each of the five foodborne pathogens was calculated both with and without the relevance criterion.ResultsThe panel ranked the health states consistently. Of the twenty health states, three did not meet the preference-based relevance criterion. Application of the relevance criterion reduced the burden of disease estimate of all five foodborne pathogens. The reduction was especially significant for norovirus and rotavirus, decreasing with 94% and 78% respectively.ConclusionIndividual preferences elicited with the TTO from a population panel can be used to empirically derive a relevance criterion for burden of disease estimates. Application of this preference-based relevance criterion results in considerable changes in ranking of foodborne pathogens.

[1]  Shekhar Saxena,et al.  Multiple-informant ranking of the disabling effects of different health conditions in 14 countries , 1999, The Lancet.

[2]  M. Essink‐bot,et al.  Cross-national comparability of burden of disease estimates: the European Disability Weights Project. , 2002, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[3]  Saakje Mulder,et al.  Assessing the burden of injury in six European countries. , 2007, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[4]  Alan D. Lopez,et al.  Summary Measures of Population Health: Concepts, Ethics, Measurement and Applications , 2002 .

[5]  A H Havelaar,et al.  Health burden in the Netherlands due to infection with thermophilic Campylobacter spp. , 2000, Epidemiology and Infection.

[6]  M. Essink‐bot,et al.  A national burden of disease calculation: Dutch disability-adjusted life-years. Dutch Burden of Disease Group. , 2000, American journal of public health.

[7]  Dean T. Jamison,et al.  World development report 1993 : investing in health , 1993 .

[8]  G W Torrance,et al.  A utility maximization model for evaluation of health care programs. , 1972, Health services research.

[9]  S. Wilson Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes , 1987 .

[10]  C. Murray,et al.  A critical examination of summary measures of population health. , 2000, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[11]  T. Vos The case against annual profiles for the valuation of disability weights , 2002 .

[12]  G. Bonsel,et al.  Comparing the standard EQ-5D three-level system with a five-level version. , 2008, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[13]  Gouke J. Bonsel,et al.  Disability Weights for Diseases: A Modified Protocol and Results for a Western European Region , 2000 .

[14]  John Brazier,et al.  A review of the use of health status measures in economic evaluation. , 1999, Health technology assessment.

[15]  Mgb,et al.  Priority setting of foodborne pathogens: disease burden and costs of selected enteric pathogens , 2006 .

[16]  G. Bonsel,et al.  The effect of adding a cognitive dimension to the EuroQol multiattribute health-status classification system. , 1999, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[17]  Marilyn J. Field,et al.  Summarizing Population Health: Directions for the Development and Application of Population Metrics , 1998 .

[18]  A. Williams EuroQol : a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life , 1990 .

[19]  J. Haagsma,et al.  International variation in clinical injury incidence: exploring the performance of indicators based on health care, anatomical and outcome criteria. , 2008, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[20]  Natasa Maksimovic,et al.  The burden of disease and injury in Serbia. , 2007, European journal of public health.

[21]  G. Bonsel,et al.  Novel empirical disability weights to assess the burden of non-fatal injury , 2008, Injury Prevention.

[22]  G. Bonsel,et al.  Feasibility and Reliability of the Annual Profile Method for Deriving QALYs for Short-Term Health Conditions , 2008, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[23]  Y. V. van Duynhoven,et al.  Gastroenteritis in sentinel general practices,The Netherlands. , 2001, Emerging infectious diseases.

[24]  E. Nord,et al.  Cross-national agreement on disability weights: the European Disability Weights Project , 2003, Population health metrics.

[25]  Steffen Flessa,et al.  Investing in health , 2007, Journal of Public Health.