title: Making use of equity sensitive QALYs: a case study on identifying the worse off across diseases.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Resource allocation decisions currently lack standard quantitative methods for incorporating concerns about the worse off when analysing the cost-effectiveness of medical interventions.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To explore and demonstrate how to identify who are the worse off without a new intervention by measuring lifetime Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) for patients across different conditions, and compare the results to using proportional shortfall of QALYs.
  
  
  METHODS
  Case study of eight condition-intervention pairs that are relevant to priority setting in Norway; childhood deafness (unilateral cochlear implant), unruptured cerebral aneurysm (coiling), morbid obesity (RY gastric bypass), adult deafness (unilateral cochlear implant), atrial fibrillation (catheter ablation), hip osteoarthritis (hip replacement), rheumatoid arthritis (TNF inhibitor) and acute stroke (stroke unit). We extracted prospective QALYs without and with new interventions from published health technology assessments and economic evaluations.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Among the eight cases, the lifetime QALY method and the proportional shortfall method yielded conflicting worse-off rank orders. Particularly two conditions had a substantial shift in ranking across the applications of the two methods: childhood deafness and acute stroke. Deaf children had the lowest expected lifetime QALYs (38.5 without a cochlear implant) and were worst off according to the lifetime approach, while patients with acute stroke had the second-highest lifetime QALYs (76.4 without stroke units). According to proportional shortfall of QALYs, patients with acute stroke were ranked as worse off than deaf children, which seems counterintuitive.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This study shows that it is feasible to identify who are the worse off empirically by the application of lifetime QALYs and proportional shortfalls. These methods ease further examination of whether there is a true conflict between maximization and equity or whether these two concerns actually coincide in real world cases. It is yet to be solved whether proportional prospective health losses are more important than absolute shortfalls in expected lifetime health in judgements about who are worse off.
authors.affiliation: Department of Research and Development, Haukeland University Hospital, Jonas Liesvei 65, 5021 Bergen, Norway.
authors.forename: Frode
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Lindemark
authors.affiliation: Department of Research and Development, Haukeland University Hospital, Jonas Liesvei 65, 5021 Bergen, Norway.
authors.forename: Ole Frithjof
authors.initials: OF
authors.lastname: Norheim
authors.affiliation: Department of Research and Development, Haukeland University Hospital, Jonas Liesvei 65, 5021 Bergen, Norway.
authors.forename: Kjell Arne
authors.initials: KA
authors.lastname: Johansson
keywords: Equity; Healthcare rationing; Priority setting in health; Quality-adjusted life years; Severity
references.citation: J Health Econ. 2013 Jul;32(4):708-14
references.pmid: 23665539
references.citation: Value Health. 2009 Mar;12 Suppl 1:S10-5
references.pmid: 19250125
references.citation: Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012 Apr;28(2):125-32
references.pmid: 22494637
references.citation: J Med Ethics. 2012 Sep;38(9):571-3
references.pmid: 22493185
references.citation: Annu Rev Public Health. 2012 Apr;33:425-45
references.pmid: 22224891
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2013 Sep 26;369(13):1190-3
references.pmid: 24015974
references.citation: Health Care Anal. 2002;10(3):309-17
references.pmid: 12769418
references.citation: Health Econ. 2003 Jul;12(7):545-51
references.pmid: 12825207
references.citation: Neurology. 1999 Jun 10;52(9):1806-15
references.pmid: 10371527
references.citation: Eur J Health Econ. 2013 Feb;14(1):107-15
references.pmid: 21870179
references.citation: Heart. 2009 Apr;95(7):542-9
references.pmid: 19095714
references.citation: Health Econ. 1997 Mar-Apr;6(2):117-32
references.pmid: 9158965
references.citation: Value Health. 2009 Mar;12 Suppl 1:S5-9
references.pmid: 19250132
references.citation: Value Health. 2009 Mar;12 Suppl 1:S31-5
references.pmid: 19250129
references.citation: Soc Sci Med. 2005 Jan;60(2):257-63
references.pmid: 15522483
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2010 Apr;10(4):60-1
references.pmid: 20379928
references.citation: Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2006 Aug 21;4:14
references.pmid: 16923181
references.citation: Soc Sci Med. 2002 Dec;55(12):2149-58
references.pmid: 12409128
references.citation: Value Health. 2013 Sep-Oct;16(6):1063-6
references.pmid: 24041356
references.citation: Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2014 Aug 29;12:18
references.pmid: 25246855
references.citation: Acta Orthop. 2007 Feb;78(1):108-15
references.pmid: 17453401
references.citation: Health Policy. 2009 Dec;93(2-3):77-84
references.pmid: 19712990
references.citation: Health Technol Assess. 2006 Nov;10(42):iii-iv, xi-xiii, 1-229
references.pmid: 17049139
references.citation: Pharmacoeconomics. 2004;22(17):1097-107
references.pmid: 15612829
references.citation: J Med Ethics. 2013 Mar;39(3):175-80
references.pmid: 23204320
references.citation: Int J Equity Health. 2009 Nov 18;8:40
references.pmid: 19922612
references.citation: Health Technol Assess. 2009 Sep;13(44):1-330
references.pmid: 19799825