Health Years in Total: A New Health Objective Function for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

OBJECTIVES To find an alternative for quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and equal value of life (EVL) measures. Despite the importance of QALY in cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA)-because it captures the effects of both life expectancy and health-related quality of life (QOL) and enables comparisons across interventions and disease areas-its potential to be discriminatory towards patients with lower QOL presents a critical challenge that has resulted in the exclusion of its use in some public decision making (eg, US Medicare) on healthcare in the United States. Alternatives to QALY, such as EVL, have not gained traction because EVL fails to recognize the QOL gains during added years of life. METHODS We present a new metric for effectiveness for CEA, health years in total (HYT), which overcomes both the specific distributional issue raised by QALY and the efficiency challenges of EVL. RESULTS The HYT framework separates life expectancy changes and QOL changes on an additive scale. HYT have the same axiomatic foundations as QALY and perform better than both QALY, in terms of the discriminatory implications, and EVL, in terms of capturing QOL gains during added years of life. HYT are straightforward to calculate within a CEA model. We found that thresholds of $34 000/HYT and $89 000/HYT correspond to CEA thresholds of $50 000/QALY and $150 000/QALY, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The HYT framework may provide a viable alternative to both the QALY and the EVL; its application to diverse healthcare technologies and stakeholder assessments are important next steps in its development and evaluation.

[1]  R. Cookson Justice and the NICE approach , 2014, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[2]  O. Norheim,et al.  Using Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Address Health Equity Concerns , 2017, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

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

[4]  J. Miyamoto,et al.  Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY) Utility Models under Expected Utility and Rank Dependent Utility Assumptions. , 1999, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[5]  Joseph S. Pliskin,et al.  Utility Functions for Life Years and Health Status , 1980, Oper. Res..

[6]  J. L. Pinto,et al.  Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes. , 1999, Health economics.

[7]  J. Quiggin,et al.  Characterizing QALYs under a General Rank Dependent Utility Model , 1997 .

[8]  M. Johannesson Should we aggregate relative or absolute changes in QALYs? , 2001, Health economics.

[9]  J. Brazier,et al.  In or out? Income losses in health state valuations: a review. , 2010, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[10]  M. Field,et al.  Ethical Issues in the Development of Summary Measures of Population Health Status , 1998 .

[11]  D. Brock Justice and the Ada: Does Prioritizing and Rationing Health Care Discriminate against the Disabled? , 1995, Social Philosophy and Policy.

[12]  A. Tsuchiya,et al.  Valuing health at the end of life: an empirical study of public preferences , 2014, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[13]  A. Culyer,et al.  Wickedness or folly? The ethics of NICE’s decisions , 2006, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[14]  W. Brouwer,et al.  Is silence golden? A test of the incorporation of the effects of ill-health on income and leisure in health state valuations. , 2005, Health economics.

[15]  T. Kjær,et al.  Disentangling public preferences for health gains at end-of-life: Further evidence of no support of an end-of-life premium. , 2019, Social science & medicine.

[16]  D. Brock Ethical Issues in the Use of Cost Effectiveness Analysis for the Prioritization of Health Resources , 2004 .