Carer Preferences in Economic Evaluation and Healthcare Decision Making
- 235 Downloads
The preferences of informal carers are important to capture for healthcare decision making. This paper discusses how these preferences relate to the economic evaluation of health and care interventions. Three main issues are highlighted. First, there is a need to consider carer impact routinely in economic evaluations. Second, more debate is required around the ethical issues stemming from the inclusion of interdependent preferences in healthcare decision making. Third, there are a number of situations where carer and patient preferences may conflict and practical ways of representing and handling these conflicts would be useful.
KeywordsEconomic Evaluation Informal Care Contingent Valuation Discrete Choice Experiment Health Gain
The authors are grateful to the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on the manuscript. The authors have no conflicts of interest and received no specific funding in relation to this manuscript. HA acknowledges funding from the UK Medical Research Council for an early career fellowship in the economics of health (G1002334).
HA drafted the manuscript with input from JR and NM. All authors revised the manuscript following peer review. HA is the guarantor for the overall content of the paper.
- 2.Pickard L. Informal care for older people provided by their adult children: projections of supply and demand to 2041 in England. University of Kent; 2008. Report No.: PSSRU Discussion Paper 2515. http://www.pssru.ac.uk/pdf/dp2515.pdf. Accessed 23 Sep 2013
- 4.Department of Health. Equity and excellence: liberating the NHS. London: The Stationery Office Limited; 2010. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/213823/dh_117794.pdf. Accessed 23 Sep 2013
- 6.Claxton K, Walker S, Palmer S, Sculpher M. Appropriate perspectives for healthcare decisions. York: Centre for Health Economics, University of York; 2010. Report No.: CHE Research Paper 54. http://www.york.ac.uk/media/che/documents/papers/researchpapers/rp54_appropriate_perspectives_for_health_care_decisions.pdf. Accessed 23 Sep 2013
- 7.Drummond M, Sculpher M, Torrance G, O’Brien B, Stoddart G. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005.Google Scholar
- 8.Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Salomon J, Tsuchiya A. Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.Google Scholar
- 15.Duff P, Dolphin C. Cost-benefit analysis of assistive technology to support independence for people with dementia—part 2: results from employing the ENABLE cost-benefit model in practice. Technol Disabil. 2007;19:79–90.Google Scholar
- 16.Wittenberg E, Prosser L. Disutility of illness for caregivers and families: a systematic review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013 Jun;31(6):489-500Google Scholar
- 20.National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. 2013. http://www.nice.org.uk/media/D45/1E/GuideToMethodsTechnologyAppraisal2013.pdf. Accessed 23 Sep 2013.
- 24.Hoefman R, Van Exel J, Rose J, van de Wetering L, Brouwer W. A discrete choice experiment to obtain tariffs for valuing informal care situations measured with the CarerQol instrument. Med Decis Making. Epub 2013 Jun 14.Google Scholar
- 26.Culyer A. The nature of the commodity ‘health care’ and its efficient allocation. Oxf Econ Pap. 1971;23(2):189–211.Google Scholar
- 33.Gomes B, Calazani N, Gysels M, Hall S, Higginson I. Heterogeneity and changes in preference for dying at home: a systematic review. BMC Palliat Care 2013;12:7.Google Scholar