Is there a case for using visual analogue scale valuations in cost-utility analysis?

This paper critically reviews theoretical and empirical propositions regarding visual analogue scale (VAS) valuations of health states and their use in cost-utility analysis (CUA). A widely repeated assertion in the economic evaluation literature is the inferiority, on theoretical grounds, of VAS valuations. Five common criticisms are: VAS lacks a theoretical foundation; VAS values are not 'choice based'; VAS values are not consistent with utility-under-uncertainty requirements; context and range effects observed in VAS valuation data mean that they cannot even be considered to represent measurable value functions; and when completing a VAS, people are not trying to express values. We address each of these points: the VAS does have a theoretical basis, being entirely consistent with the non-welfarist foundations of QALYs and CUA; the 'choiceless' nature of the VAS is incorrectly judged by stated preference criteria relevant to monetary rather than health state valuations, and VAS valuations do in any case involve an element of choice; because valuations are intended for use in social decision-making, it may be advantageous that VAS values are elicited under conditions of certainty; although there are measurement problems with the VAS, means such as better design and transformations of data can deal with these; and with any method of eliciting values, it is unrealistic to expect people consciously to think in terms of social science constructs such as utilities.Moreover, there are problems, both theoretical and empirical, with alternative methods. Selection of the appropriate valuation method should be based on empirical performance, and in this the VAS has important advantages. We conclude that there are strong grounds for disputing the consensus view against the VAS and challenge those who hold it to deploy more convincing arguments and evidence in favour of alternative methods. However, we identify areas where further research is required to establish and consolidate the potential of the VAS as a valuation method.

[1]  G. Torrance Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. , 1986, Journal of health economics.

[2]  Isaac Marks,et al.  A.J. Culyer York Studies in Economics and social choice. Need and the National Health Service . Martin Robinson, 1976. Price £2.95 (paperback) £6.50 (boards) , 1977, B.A.B.P. bulletin.

[3]  Anthony J. Culyer,et al.  Social indicators: health , 1971 .

[4]  Frank de Charro,et al.  The Measurement and Valuation of Health Status Using EQ-5D: A European Perspective , 2003, Springer Netherlands.

[5]  Rakesh K. Sarin,et al.  RELATIVE RISK AVERSION. , 1982 .

[6]  Andrew Booth,et al.  A Review of the Use of Health Status Measures in Economic Evaluation , 1999, Journal of health services research & policy.

[7]  I. Bateman Economic valuation with stated preference techniques : a manual : department for transport , 2002 .

[8]  P. Wakker,et al.  Reconciling introspective utility with revealed preference: Experimental arguments based on prospect theory , 2007 .

[9]  George W. Torrance,et al.  Application of Multi-Attribute Utility Theory to Measure Social Preferences for Health States , 1982, Oper. Res..

[10]  G W Torrance,et al.  Economic evaluation of neonatal intensive care of very-low-birth-weight infants. , 1983, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  A. Norinder,et al.  The weighting exercise for the Swedish version of the EuroQol. , 1999, Health economics.

[12]  K C Cain,et al.  Measuring Preferences for Health States Worse than Death , 1994, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[13]  Paul Kind,et al.  Logical inconsistencies in survey respondents' health state valuations -- a methodological challenge for estimating social tariffs. , 2003, Health economics.

[14]  P. Hansen,et al.  A ‘new and improved’ EQ-5D valuation questionnaire? , 2005, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[15]  N. Devlin,et al.  A theoretical framework for TTO valuations and a taxonomy of TTO approaches: results from a pilot study , 2004 .

[16]  Rakesh K. Sarin,et al.  Measurable Multiattribute Value Functions , 1979, Oper. Res..

[17]  B J Cohen,et al.  Is Expected Utility Theory Normative for Medical Decision Making? , 1996, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[18]  J. Kagel,et al.  Handbook of Experimental Economics , 1997 .

[19]  Anthony J. Culyer,et al.  Need and the National Health Service: Economics and social choice , 1976 .

[20]  C. Donaldson,et al.  Valuing the benefits and costs of health care programmes: where's the 'extra' in extra-welfarism? , 2003, Social science & medicine.

[21]  P. Kind,et al.  The health state preferences and logistical inconsistencies of New Zealanders: a tale of two tariffs , 2000 .

[22]  H. Klarman,et al.  Cost Effectiveness Analysis Applied to the Treatment of Chronic Renal Disease , 1968 .

[23]  J. Richardson,et al.  Cost utility analysis: what should be measured? , 1994, Social science & medicine.

[24]  G Loomes,et al.  Visual Analog Scales, Standard Gambles, and Relative Risk Aversion , 2001, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[25]  Christopher McCabe,et al.  Visual Analogue Scales: do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health states? , 2004 .

[26]  Nigel Rice,et al.  Use of a visual analogue scale in a daily patient diary: modelling cross-sectional time-series data on health-related quality of life. , 2004, Social science & medicine.

[27]  D. Fryback,et al.  HALYS and QALYS and DALYS, Oh My: similarities and differences in summary measures of population Health. , 2002, Annual review of public health.

[28]  K. Sahu,et al.  A Re-examination of the , 2001 .

[29]  Richard J. Rogalski,et al.  A Re-Examination , 1978 .

[30]  Angela Robinson,et al.  Responses to standard gambles: are preferences 'well constructed'? , 2004, Health economics.

[31]  Paul Hansen,et al.  Understanding health state valuations: A qualitative analysis of respondents' comments , 2004, Quality of Life Research.

[32]  H. Klarman Application of Cost-Benefit Analysis to the Health Services and the Special Case of Technologic Innovation , 1974, International journal of health services : planning, administration, evaluation.

[33]  A. Sen,et al.  Social Choice Theory: A Re-Examination , 1977 .

[34]  P. Hansen,et al.  A "new and improved" EQ-5D valuation questionnaire? Results from a pilot study. , 2005, The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care.

[35]  C D Naylor,et al.  Using a Trade-off Technique to Assess Patients' Treatment Preferences for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia , 1996, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[36]  M. Johannesson,et al.  Outcome measurement in economic evaluation. , 1996, Health economics.

[37]  J. Neumann,et al.  Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. , 1945 .

[38]  T. Treasure The measurement of health related quality of life , 1999, Heart.

[39]  E. Nord The trade-off between severity of illness and treatment effect in cost-value analysis of health care. , 1993, Health policy.

[40]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk — Source link , 2007 .

[41]  Grazyna Adamiak,et al.  Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes, 3rd ed , 2006 .

[42]  P. Dolan,et al.  Time preference, duration and health state valuations. , 1995, Health economics.

[43]  M. Drummond,et al.  Health Care Technology: Effectiveness, Efficiency and Public Policy@@@Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes , 1988 .

[44]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  The Measurement of Patients' Values in Medicine , 1982, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[45]  P. Schoemaker The Expected Utility Model: Its Variants, Purposes, Evidence and Limitations , 1982 .

[46]  R. Sugden,et al.  Regret Theory: An alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty Review of Economic Studies , 1982 .

[47]  H. Fineberg,et al.  Preferences for Health Outcomes , 1984, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[48]  J. Neumann,et al.  Theory of games and economic behavior , 1945, 100 Years of Math Milestones.

[49]  Rating Scales in Context , 1998, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[50]  E. Nord,et al.  The validity of a visual analogue scale in determining social utility weights for health states. , 1991, The International journal of health planning and management.

[51]  M. Drummond,et al.  Economic Evaluation in Health Care: Merging Theory with Practice , 2002 .

[52]  Paul Kind,et al.  Guidelines for value sets in economic and non-economic studies using EQ-5D , 2003 .

[53]  M Johannesson,et al.  An Experimental Test of a Theoretical Foundation for Rating-scale Valuations , 1997, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[54]  A. Parducci Chapter 5 – CONTEXTUAL EFFECTS: A RANGE–FREQUENCY ANALYSIS* , 1974 .

[55]  Ian J. Bateman,et al.  Economic Valuation With Stated Preference Techniques , 2002 .

[56]  A. Culyer THE NORMATIVE ECONOMICS OF HEALTH CARE FINANCE AND PROVISION , 1989 .

[57]  M. Weinstein,et al.  Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. , 1977, The New England journal of medicine.

[58]  Planning, programming, budgeting : a systems approach to management , 1968 .