Willingness to pay for a QALY: theoretical and methodological issues.

Dorte Gyrd-Hansen
Author Information
  1. Dorte Gyrd-Hansen: Health Economics Unit, Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. dgh@sam.sdu.dk

Abstract

What is a QALY worth in monetary units? This paper presents the main arguments in the literature regarding the obstacles involved in establishing one unique willingness to pay (WTP) estimate for the value of a QALY. To directly translate QALYs into monetary units, and in this manner translate existing and forthcoming cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) to cost-benefit analyses (CBA), it is necessary that one unique WTP per QALY can be established irrespective of context-specific characteristics such as severity of illness, magnitude of health gain, patient characteristics, etc. Because CEA and CBA are two methods of economic evaluation that are based on two very different normative perceptions of the role of health versus other goods in society, the task of performing a linear translation from QALYs to WTP is theoretically unattainable. CBA is based on the welfarist perception that the welfare associated with health is measured by way of individual preferences for health outcomes relative to other goods in society. In contrast, CEA is based on the extra-welfarist notion, which focuses on maximising health and not welfare, and suppresses any variation across income/social groups in utility derived from improvements in health. Another obstacle to one unique WTP per QALY value is that marginal utility of income is non-constant, and a function of income level and possibly health status. When marginal utility of income varies across individuals as well as contexts, measuring the value of health in monetary units may result in valuations of health increments that are very different from valuations retrieved had another unit of measure been applied. In conclusion, from a theoretical point of view, establishing one unique WTP cannot be attained. Applying one sole WTP per QALY value will entail overriding individual preferences such as diminishing marginal utility of health and potential differences in the value of incremental health across population groups. However, one problem that can, and should, be overcome when seeking to establish a monetary value for a QALY is the problem of variance in the marginal utility of income. The importance of applying the appropriate perspective when formulating WTP questions to ensure that the marginal utility of income of the respondents equals that of the financiers of the costs invested to produce the health gains should not be overlooked.

References

  1. Health Econ. 2000 Mar;9(2):137-48 [PMID: 10721015]
  2. Health Policy. 1997 Sep;41(3):181-7 [PMID: 10170087]
  3. Health Econ. 2003 Dec;12(12):1049-60 [PMID: 14673813]
  4. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1996 Winter;12(1):31-44 [PMID: 8690560]
  5. Risk Anal. 1995 Jun;15(3):369-90 [PMID: 7604170]
  6. Med Decis Making. 1997 Jul-Sep;17(3):276-84 [PMID: 9219187]
  7. Health Econ. 2003 Jul;12(7):545-51 [PMID: 12825207]
  8. Health Econ. 1999 Dec;8(8):701-7 [PMID: 10590471]
  9. Health Econ. 1998 Mar;7(2):121-7 [PMID: 9565168]
  10. Health Policy. 1999 Oct;49(1-2):63-74 [PMID: 10827291]
  11. Med Care. 1991 Dec;29(12):1246-52 [PMID: 1745082]
  12. Health Econ. 2001 Jan;10(1):39-52 [PMID: 11180568]
  13. Health Policy. 1997 Mar;39(3):241-53 [PMID: 10165464]
  14. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1993 Fall;9(4):463-78 [PMID: 8288424]
  15. Med Decis Making. 1995 Jul-Sep;15(3):201-8 [PMID: 7564933]
  16. Health Econ. 1998 Feb;7(1):1-7 [PMID: 9541079]
  17. Health Econ. 1998 Jun;7(4):307-12 [PMID: 9683091]
  18. Pharmacoeconomics. 2001;19(11):1103-9 [PMID: 11735677]
  19. Soc Sci Med. 1999 Dec;49(11):1529-39 [PMID: 10515634]
  20. Soc Sci Med. 1999 Jan;48(2):267-76 [PMID: 10048783]
  21. Soc Sci Med. 1995 Aug;41(4):483-9 [PMID: 7481942]
  22. Soc Sci Med. 1999 Oct;49(7):895-903 [PMID: 10468394]
  23. Health Econ. 2002 Jan;11(1):55-70 [PMID: 11788982]
  24. Med Decis Making. 1996 Apr-Jun;16(2):108-16 [PMID: 8778528]
  25. Soc Sci Med. 1989;28(12 ):1331-8 [PMID: 2734629]
  26. Health Policy. 2000 Feb;51(1):19-30 [PMID: 11010223]
  27. Health Econ. 2000 Oct;9(7):611-21 [PMID: 11103927]
  28. CMAJ. 1992 Feb 15;146(4):473-81 [PMID: 1306034]
  29. Med Care. 2000 Apr;38(4):366-73 [PMID: 10752968]
  30. Med Care. 1994 Jul;32(7):686-99 [PMID: 8028404]
  31. J Health Econ. 1999 Dec;18(6):681-708 [PMID: 10847930]
  32. J Health Econ. 2002 Sep;21(5):827-43 [PMID: 12349884]
  33. Med Decis Making. 2000 Jul-Sep;20(3):332-42 [PMID: 10929856]
  34. Health Econ. 1999 Mar;8(2):171-4 [PMID: 10342730]

MeSH Term

Cost-Benefit Analysis
Health Planning
Humans
Quality-Adjusted Life Years

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0healthWTPQALYonevalueutilitymarginalincomemonetaryuniqueCEACBAperbasedacrossestablishingpaytranslateQALYsunitsanalysescancharacteristicstwodifferentgoodssocietywelfareindividualpreferencesgroupsvaluationstheoreticalproblemworthunits?paperpresentsmainargumentsliteratureregardingobstaclesinvolvedwillingnessestimatedirectlymannerexistingforthcomingcost-effectivenesscost-benefitnecessaryestablishedirrespectivecontext-specificseverityillnessmagnitudegainpatientetcmethodseconomicevaluationnormativeperceptionsroleversustaskperforminglineartranslationtheoreticallyunattainablewelfaristperceptionassociatedmeasuredwayoutcomesrelativecontrastextra-welfaristnotionfocusesmaximisingsuppressesvariationincome/socialderivedimprovementsAnotherobstaclenon-constantfunctionlevelpossiblystatusvariesindividualswellcontextsmeasuringmayresultincrementsretrievedanotherunitmeasureappliedconclusionpointviewattainedApplyingsolewillentailoverridingdiminishingpotentialdifferencesincrementalpopulationHoweverovercomeseekingestablishvarianceimportanceapplyingappropriateperspectiveformulatingquestionsensurerespondentsequalsfinancierscostsinvestedproducegainsoverlookedWillingnessQALY:methodologicalissues

Similar Articles

Cited By