Benson Tim
a R-Outcomes Ltd , Thatcham , UK.
b University College London, Institute of Health Informatics , London , UK.
J Med Econ. 2017 Feb;20(2):107-113. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2016.1229198. Epub 2016 Sep 7.
QALYs are widely used in health economic evaluation, but remain controversial, largely because they do not reflect how many people behave in practice. This paper presents a new conceptual model (Load Model) and illustrates it in comparison with the QALY model.
Load is the average annual weight attributed to morbidity and mortality over a defined period, using weightings based on preference judgements. Morbidity Load is attributed to states of illness, according to their perceived severity. When people are in full health, Load is zero (no morbidity). Death is treated as an event with negative consequences, incurred in the year following death. Deaths may be weighted equally, with a fixed negative weight such as -100, or differ according to the context of death. After death, Load is zero. In a worked example, we use the standard gamble method to obtain a weighting for an illness state, for both Load and QALY models. A judge is indifferent between certainty of 1.5 years' illness followed by death, or a 50/50 chance of 1.5 years' full health or 1-year illness, each followed by death. The weightings calculated are applied to a hypothetical life, 72 years in full health followed by 3 years with illness then death, using both models. Three other hypothetical outcomes are also compared.
For an example life, the relative size of the morbidity component compared with the mortality component is much higher in the Load model than in the QALY model. When comparing alternative outcomes, there are also substantial differences between the two models.
In the Load model the weight of morbidity, relative to mortality, is very different from that in the QALY model. Given the role of the QALYs in economic evaluation, the implications of an alternative, which generates very different results, warrant further exploration.
质量调整生命年(QALYs)在健康经济评估中被广泛使用,但仍存在争议,主要是因为它们没有反映出人们在实际中的行为方式。本文提出了一种新的概念模型(负荷模型),并将其与QALY模型进行比较说明。
负荷是在规定时期内归因于发病和死亡的年均权重,使用基于偏好判断的加权方法。发病负荷根据疾病状态的感知严重程度归因于疾病状态。当人们处于完全健康状态时,负荷为零(无发病情况)。死亡被视为在死亡后一年产生负面后果的事件。死亡可能被赋予相同的权重,如固定的负权重-100,或者根据死亡背景而有所不同。死亡后,负荷为零。在一个实例中,我们使用标准博弈法为负荷模型和QALY模型的疾病状态获取权重。一名受试者在确定的1.5年疾病后死亡与50/50的1.5年完全健康或1年疾病后死亡的机会之间无差异。计算出的权重应用于一个假设的生命历程,即72年完全健康后3年患病然后死亡,同时使用这两种模型。还比较了其他三种假设结果。
对于一个示例生命历程,负荷模型中发病成分与死亡成分的相对大小比QALY模型中高得多。在比较替代结果时,两种模型之间也存在重大差异。
在负荷模型中,发病相对于死亡的权重与QALY模型中的非常不同。鉴于QALYs在经济评估中的作用,产生非常不同结果的替代方案的影响值得进一步探讨。