Cargando…

Euthanasia, religiosity and the valuation of health states: results from an Irish EQ5D5L valuation study and their implications for anchor values

BACKGROUND: The Quality Adjusted Life Year influences the allocation of significant amounts of healthcare resources. Despite this surprisingly little research effort has been devoted to analysing how beliefs and attitudes to hastening death influence preferences for health states anchored at “dead”...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Barry, Luke, Hobbins, Anna, Kelleher, Daniel, Shah, Koonal, Devlin, Nancy, Goni, Juan Manuel Ramos, O’Neill, Ciaran
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6069795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30064460
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-0985-9
_version_ 1783343570928795648
author Barry, Luke
Hobbins, Anna
Kelleher, Daniel
Shah, Koonal
Devlin, Nancy
Goni, Juan Manuel Ramos
O’Neill, Ciaran
author_facet Barry, Luke
Hobbins, Anna
Kelleher, Daniel
Shah, Koonal
Devlin, Nancy
Goni, Juan Manuel Ramos
O’Neill, Ciaran
author_sort Barry, Luke
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Quality Adjusted Life Year influences the allocation of significant amounts of healthcare resources. Despite this surprisingly little research effort has been devoted to analysing how beliefs and attitudes to hastening death influence preferences for health states anchored at “dead” and “perfect health”. In this paper we examine how, inter alia, adherence to particular religious beliefs (religiosity) influences attitudes to euthanasia and how, inter alia, attitudes to euthanasia influences the willingness to assign worse than dead (WTD) values to health states using data collected as part of the Irish EQ5D5L valuation study. METHODS: A sample of 160 respondents each supplied 10 composite time trade-off valuations and information on religiosity and attitudes to euthanasia as part of a larger national survey. Data were analysed using a recursive bivariate probit model in which attitudes to euthanasia and willingness to assign WTD values were analysed jointly as functions of a range of covariates. RESULTS: Religiosity was a significant determinant of attitudes to euthanasia and attitudes to euthanasia were a significant determinant of the likelihood of assigning WTD values. A significant negative correlation in errors between the two probit models was observed indicative of support for the hypothesis of endogeneity between attitudes to euthanasia and readiness to assign WTD values. CONCLUSION: In Ireland attitudes and beliefs play an important role in understanding health state preferences. Beyond Ireland this may have implications for: the construction of representative samples; understanding the values accorded health states and; the frequency with which value sets must be updated. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12955-018-0985-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6069795
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60697952018-08-03 Euthanasia, religiosity and the valuation of health states: results from an Irish EQ5D5L valuation study and their implications for anchor values Barry, Luke Hobbins, Anna Kelleher, Daniel Shah, Koonal Devlin, Nancy Goni, Juan Manuel Ramos O’Neill, Ciaran Health Qual Life Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: The Quality Adjusted Life Year influences the allocation of significant amounts of healthcare resources. Despite this surprisingly little research effort has been devoted to analysing how beliefs and attitudes to hastening death influence preferences for health states anchored at “dead” and “perfect health”. In this paper we examine how, inter alia, adherence to particular religious beliefs (religiosity) influences attitudes to euthanasia and how, inter alia, attitudes to euthanasia influences the willingness to assign worse than dead (WTD) values to health states using data collected as part of the Irish EQ5D5L valuation study. METHODS: A sample of 160 respondents each supplied 10 composite time trade-off valuations and information on religiosity and attitudes to euthanasia as part of a larger national survey. Data were analysed using a recursive bivariate probit model in which attitudes to euthanasia and willingness to assign WTD values were analysed jointly as functions of a range of covariates. RESULTS: Religiosity was a significant determinant of attitudes to euthanasia and attitudes to euthanasia were a significant determinant of the likelihood of assigning WTD values. A significant negative correlation in errors between the two probit models was observed indicative of support for the hypothesis of endogeneity between attitudes to euthanasia and readiness to assign WTD values. CONCLUSION: In Ireland attitudes and beliefs play an important role in understanding health state preferences. Beyond Ireland this may have implications for: the construction of representative samples; understanding the values accorded health states and; the frequency with which value sets must be updated. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12955-018-0985-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-07-31 /pmc/articles/PMC6069795/ /pubmed/30064460 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-0985-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Barry, Luke
Hobbins, Anna
Kelleher, Daniel
Shah, Koonal
Devlin, Nancy
Goni, Juan Manuel Ramos
O’Neill, Ciaran
Euthanasia, religiosity and the valuation of health states: results from an Irish EQ5D5L valuation study and their implications for anchor values
title Euthanasia, religiosity and the valuation of health states: results from an Irish EQ5D5L valuation study and their implications for anchor values
title_full Euthanasia, religiosity and the valuation of health states: results from an Irish EQ5D5L valuation study and their implications for anchor values
title_fullStr Euthanasia, religiosity and the valuation of health states: results from an Irish EQ5D5L valuation study and their implications for anchor values
title_full_unstemmed Euthanasia, religiosity and the valuation of health states: results from an Irish EQ5D5L valuation study and their implications for anchor values
title_short Euthanasia, religiosity and the valuation of health states: results from an Irish EQ5D5L valuation study and their implications for anchor values
title_sort euthanasia, religiosity and the valuation of health states: results from an irish eq5d5l valuation study and their implications for anchor values
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6069795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30064460
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-0985-9
work_keys_str_mv AT barryluke euthanasiareligiosityandthevaluationofhealthstatesresultsfromanirisheq5d5lvaluationstudyandtheirimplicationsforanchorvalues
AT hobbinsanna euthanasiareligiosityandthevaluationofhealthstatesresultsfromanirisheq5d5lvaluationstudyandtheirimplicationsforanchorvalues
AT kelleherdaniel euthanasiareligiosityandthevaluationofhealthstatesresultsfromanirisheq5d5lvaluationstudyandtheirimplicationsforanchorvalues
AT shahkoonal euthanasiareligiosityandthevaluationofhealthstatesresultsfromanirisheq5d5lvaluationstudyandtheirimplicationsforanchorvalues
AT devlinnancy euthanasiareligiosityandthevaluationofhealthstatesresultsfromanirisheq5d5lvaluationstudyandtheirimplicationsforanchorvalues
AT gonijuanmanuelramos euthanasiareligiosityandthevaluationofhealthstatesresultsfromanirisheq5d5lvaluationstudyandtheirimplicationsforanchorvalues
AT oneillciaran euthanasiareligiosityandthevaluationofhealthstatesresultsfromanirisheq5d5lvaluationstudyandtheirimplicationsforanchorvalues