Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T05:58:29.847Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Ranking Properties of Healthy-Years Equivalents and Quality-Adjusted Life-Years Under Certainty and Uncertainty

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Magnus Johannesson
Magnus Johannesson
Affiliation:
Stockholm School of Economics and Harvard School of Public Health
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper investigates the theoretical properties of healthy-years equivalents (HYEs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). A distinction is made between ex ante HYEs (EA-HYEs) and expected HYEs (EXP-HYEs) and between risk-neutral quality-adjusted life-years (RN-QALYs) and risk-adjusted quality adjusted life-years (RA-QALYs). In the case of certainty, HYEs always rank health profiles according to individual preferences, whereas QALYs only rank health profiles according to individual preferences if constant proportional trade-off holds for all health states and if additive independence of quality in different periods holds. In the case of uncertainty, EA-HYEs always rank risky health profiles the same way as expected utility. The assumptions needed for the other measures to rank risky health profiles the same way as expected utility are: risk neutrality with respect to healthy time for EXP-HYEs; risk neutrality with respect to time in all health states and additive independence of quality in different periods for RN-HYEs; and constant proportional risk posture with respect to time in all health states and additive independence of quality in different periods for RA-QALYs.

Type
General Essays
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , Winter 1995 , pp. 40 - 48
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Drummond, M. F., Stoddart, G. L., & Torrance, G. W.Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford Medical Publications, 1987.Google Scholar
2.Gafni, A.Willingness-to-pay as a measure of benefits: Relevant questions in the context of public decisionmaking about health care programs. Medical Care, 1991, 29, 1246–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Johannesson, M., Pliskin, J. S., & Weinstein, M. C.Are healthy-years equivalents an improvement over quality-adjusted life-years? Medical Decision Making, 1993, 13, 281–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Johannesson, M., Pliskin, J. S., & Weinstein, M. C.A note on QALYs, time-trade-off, and discounting. Medical Decision Making, 1994, 18, 188–93.Google Scholar
5.Loomes, G., & McKenzie, L.The use of QALYs in health care decision making. Social Science and Medicine, 1989, 28, 299–308.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.McNeil, B. J., Weichselbaum, R., & Pauker, S. G.Speech and survival: Tradeoffs between quality and quantity of life in laryngeal cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 1981, 305, 982–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Mehrez, A., & Gafni, A.Quality adjusted life years, utility theory, and healthy-years equivalents. Medical Decision Making, 1989, 9, 142–49.Google Scholar
8.Mehrez, A., & Gafni, A.The healthy-years equivalents: How to measure them using the standard gamble approach. Medical Decision Making, 1991, 11, 140–46.Google Scholar
9.Miyamoto, J. M., & Eraker, S. A.Parameter estimates for a QALY utility model. Medical Decision Making, 1985, 5, 191–213.Google Scholar
10.Miyamoto, J. M., & Eraker, S. A.Parametric models of the utility of survival duration: Tests of axioms in a generic utility framework. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1989, 44, 162–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Pliskin, J. S., Shepard, D. S., & Weinstein, M. C.Utility functions for life years and health status. Operations Research, 1980, 28, 206–24.Google Scholar
12.Torrance, G. W., Thomas, W. H., & Sackett, D. L.A utility maximization model for evaluation of health care programmes. Health Services Research, 1972, 7, 118–33.Google Scholar
13.von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O.Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1947.Google Scholar
14.Weinstien, M. C., & Stason, W. B.Hypertension: A policy perspective. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1976.Google Scholar