Cargando…

Using QALYs in telehealth evaluations: a systematic review of methodology and transparency

BACKGROUND: The quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) is a recognised outcome measure in health economic evaluations. QALY incorporates individual preferences and identifies health gains by combining mortality and morbidity into one single index number. A literature review was conducted to examine and d...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Bergmo, Trine S
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4132195/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25086443
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-332
_version_ 1782330578568216576
author Bergmo, Trine S
author_facet Bergmo, Trine S
author_sort Bergmo, Trine S
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) is a recognised outcome measure in health economic evaluations. QALY incorporates individual preferences and identifies health gains by combining mortality and morbidity into one single index number. A literature review was conducted to examine and discuss the use of QALYs to measure outcomes in telehealth evaluations. METHODS: Evaluations were identified via a literature search in all relevant databases. Only economic evaluations measuring both costs and QALYs using primary patient level data of two or more alternatives were included. RESULTS: A total of 17 economic evaluations estimating QALYs were identified. All evaluations used validated generic health related-quality of life (HRQoL) instruments to describe health states. They used accepted methods for transforming the quality scores into utility values. The methodology used varied between the evaluations. The evaluations used four different preference measures (EQ-5D, SF-6D, QWB and HUI3), and utility scores were elicited from the general population. Most studies reported the methodology used in calculating QALYs. The evaluations were less transparent in reporting utility weights at different time points and variability around utilities and QALYs. Few made adjustments for differences in baseline utilities. The QALYs gained in the reviewed evaluations varied from 0.001 to 0.118 in implying a small but positive effect of telehealth intervention on patient’s health. The evaluations reported mixed cost-effectiveness results. CONCLUSION: The use of QALYs in telehealth evaluations has increased over the last few years. Different methodologies and utility measures have been used to calculate QALYs. A more harmonised methodology and utility measure is needed to ensure comparability across telehealth evaluations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4132195
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41321952014-08-18 Using QALYs in telehealth evaluations: a systematic review of methodology and transparency Bergmo, Trine S BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: The quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) is a recognised outcome measure in health economic evaluations. QALY incorporates individual preferences and identifies health gains by combining mortality and morbidity into one single index number. A literature review was conducted to examine and discuss the use of QALYs to measure outcomes in telehealth evaluations. METHODS: Evaluations were identified via a literature search in all relevant databases. Only economic evaluations measuring both costs and QALYs using primary patient level data of two or more alternatives were included. RESULTS: A total of 17 economic evaluations estimating QALYs were identified. All evaluations used validated generic health related-quality of life (HRQoL) instruments to describe health states. They used accepted methods for transforming the quality scores into utility values. The methodology used varied between the evaluations. The evaluations used four different preference measures (EQ-5D, SF-6D, QWB and HUI3), and utility scores were elicited from the general population. Most studies reported the methodology used in calculating QALYs. The evaluations were less transparent in reporting utility weights at different time points and variability around utilities and QALYs. Few made adjustments for differences in baseline utilities. The QALYs gained in the reviewed evaluations varied from 0.001 to 0.118 in implying a small but positive effect of telehealth intervention on patient’s health. The evaluations reported mixed cost-effectiveness results. CONCLUSION: The use of QALYs in telehealth evaluations has increased over the last few years. Different methodologies and utility measures have been used to calculate QALYs. A more harmonised methodology and utility measure is needed to ensure comparability across telehealth evaluations. BioMed Central 2014-08-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4132195/ /pubmed/25086443 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-332 Text en Copyright © 2014 Bergmo; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bergmo, Trine S
Using QALYs in telehealth evaluations: a systematic review of methodology and transparency
title Using QALYs in telehealth evaluations: a systematic review of methodology and transparency
title_full Using QALYs in telehealth evaluations: a systematic review of methodology and transparency
title_fullStr Using QALYs in telehealth evaluations: a systematic review of methodology and transparency
title_full_unstemmed Using QALYs in telehealth evaluations: a systematic review of methodology and transparency
title_short Using QALYs in telehealth evaluations: a systematic review of methodology and transparency
title_sort using qalys in telehealth evaluations: a systematic review of methodology and transparency
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4132195/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25086443
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-332
work_keys_str_mv AT bergmotrines usingqalysintelehealthevaluationsasystematicreviewofmethodologyandtransparency