Health Economics Group, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, South Cloisters, St Luke's Campus, Magdalen Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
NIHR CLAHRC South West Peninsula (PenCLAHRC), University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2018 Apr;16(2):187-194. doi: 10.1007/s40258-017-0355-5.
Over recent years, public involvement in health research has expanded considerably. However, public involvement in designing and conducting health economics research is seldom reported. Here we describe the development, delivery and assessment of an approach for involving people in a clearly defined piece of health economics research: selecting health states for valuation in estimating quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). This involvement formed part of a study to develop a condition-specific preference-based measure of health-related quality of life, the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-8D), and the work reported here relates to the identification of plausible, or realistic, health states for valuation. An Expert Panel of three people with multiple sclerosis (MS) was recruited from a local involvement network, and two health economists designed an interactive task that enabled the Panel to identify health states that were implausible, or unlikely to be experienced. Following some initial confusion over terminology, which was resolved by discussion with the Panel, the task worked well and can be adapted to select health states for valuation in the development of any preference-based measure. As part of the involvement process, five themes were identified by the Panel members and the researchers which summarised our experiences of public involvement in this health economics research example: proportionality, task design, prior involvement, protectiveness and partnerships. These are described in the paper, along with their practical implications for involving members of the public in health economics research. Our experience demonstrates how members of the public and health economists can work together to improve the validity of health economics research. Plain Language Summary It has become commonplace to involve members of the public in health service research. However, published reports of involving people in designing health economics research are rare. We describe how we designed a way of involving people in a particular piece of health economics research.The aim of the work was to produce descriptions of different states of health experienced by people with multiple sclerosis (MS). These descriptions have since been rated in terms of how good or bad they are in a way that can be used by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to make decisions about what services to fund on the NHS.We formed a panel of three people with MS, and designed a task to help the group produce health descriptions likely to be experienced by people with MS. After discussion about jargon, and working together to find more layman's terms, the task worked well, and can be adapted to produce health descriptions for any condition.We identified some key themes about working together that give insights into how members of the public can be involved in health economics research, and show the importance of their involvement in improving the relevance of this research.
近年来,公众对健康研究的参与度大大提高。然而,公众参与健康经济学研究的设计和实施却很少有报道。在这里,我们描述了一种方法的开发、实施和评估,该方法用于使人们参与到一项明确的健康经济学研究中:为估计质量调整生命年(QALYs)选择健康状态进行评估。这种参与是一项开发特定于疾病的健康相关生活质量偏好测量工具的研究的一部分,即多发性硬化症影响量表(MSIS-8D),这里报告的工作与确定用于评估的合理或现实的健康状态有关。我们从当地的参与网络中招募了一个由三人组成的多发性硬化症(MS)专家小组,以及两名健康经济学家,设计了一项互动任务,使小组能够确定不太可能或不太可能经历的健康状态。在术语方面最初存在一些困惑,通过与小组讨论解决了这些问题,该任务运行良好,可以适应于在任何偏好测量工具的开发中选择用于评估的健康状态。作为参与过程的一部分,小组成员和研究人员确定了五个主题,这些主题总结了我们在这个健康经济学研究示例中公众参与的经验:相称性、任务设计、事先参与、保护性和伙伴关系。本文描述了这些主题,以及它们对健康经济学研究中公众参与的实际影响。我们的经验表明,公众成员和健康经济学家如何能够共同努力提高健康经济学研究的有效性。