Preferences for health-related quality of life: do they vary by age? A systematic literature review on the EQ-5D measure.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Alhanouf Alabbad, Madeleine Cochrane, Paul Mark Mitchell
{"title":"Preferences for health-related quality of life: do they vary by age? A systematic literature review on the EQ-5D measure.","authors":"Alhanouf Alabbad, Madeleine Cochrane, Paul Mark Mitchell","doi":"10.1007/s10198-025-01766-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Cost-utility analysis (CUA) is a commonly used method in Health technology assessment (HTA) that utilises generic metrics such as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). QALY is a measure derived from individuals' preferences for different health states, with these preferences represented as utility values. However, utility values may differ by age, raising equity concerns in healthcare allocation. Given the globally ageing demographic, understanding the age-utility relationship becomes essential.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This systematic review aimed to explore the impact of age on utility values derived from the EQ-5D, a widely used instrument in CUA that contributes to calculating QALYs by assessing five dimensions of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Our search used the comprehensive pearl growing approach and database searching. We included studies that analysed the effect of age on EQ-5D utility values in the general population. We excluded qualitative, non-English, and non-EQ-5D instrument studies. Quality was appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute tool, and a narrative synthesis was used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 28 studies reviewed, primarily from Europe and the Americas, the average age of participants ranged from 34.1 and 47.7 years. Around 46% (n = 13) associated older age with lower utility values; 28% (n = 8) with higher utility; and 25% (n = 7) found no consistent relationship between age and utility.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Age was identified as a critical factor affecting EQ-5D-derived utility values, with implications for the equitable distribution of healthcare resources. These findings corroborate previous research on utility measurement across different instruments, highlighting the ethical and policy issues due to age-related utility differences.</p>","PeriodicalId":51416,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Economics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Health Economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-025-01766-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Cost-utility analysis (CUA) is a commonly used method in Health technology assessment (HTA) that utilises generic metrics such as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). QALY is a measure derived from individuals' preferences for different health states, with these preferences represented as utility values. However, utility values may differ by age, raising equity concerns in healthcare allocation. Given the globally ageing demographic, understanding the age-utility relationship becomes essential.

Objectives: This systematic review aimed to explore the impact of age on utility values derived from the EQ-5D, a widely used instrument in CUA that contributes to calculating QALYs by assessing five dimensions of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression.

Methods: Our search used the comprehensive pearl growing approach and database searching. We included studies that analysed the effect of age on EQ-5D utility values in the general population. We excluded qualitative, non-English, and non-EQ-5D instrument studies. Quality was appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute tool, and a narrative synthesis was used.

Results: Of the 28 studies reviewed, primarily from Europe and the Americas, the average age of participants ranged from 34.1 and 47.7 years. Around 46% (n = 13) associated older age with lower utility values; 28% (n = 8) with higher utility; and 25% (n = 7) found no consistent relationship between age and utility.

Discussion: Age was identified as a critical factor affecting EQ-5D-derived utility values, with implications for the equitable distribution of healthcare resources. These findings corroborate previous research on utility measurement across different instruments, highlighting the ethical and policy issues due to age-related utility differences.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.30%
发文量
131
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Health Economics is a journal of Health Economics and associated disciplines. The growing demand for health economics and the introduction of new guidelines in various European countries were the motivation to generate a highly scientific and at the same time practice oriented journal considering the requirements of various health care systems in Europe. The international scientific board of opinion leaders guarantees high-quality, peer-reviewed publications as well as articles for pragmatic approaches in the field of health economics. We intend to cover all aspects of health economics: • Basics of health economic approaches and methods • Pharmacoeconomics • Health Care Systems • Pricing and Reimbursement Systems • Quality-of-Life-Studies The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The author will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill the above-mentioned requirements. Officially cited as: Eur J Health Econ
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信