Purpose The objective of this study was to develop an EQ-5D-5L value set based on the health preferences of the general adult population of Vietnam. Methods The EQ-VT protocol version 2.1 was applied. Multi-stage stratified cluster sampling was employed to recruit a nationally representative sample. Both composite time trade-off (C-TTO) and discrete choice experiment (DCE) methods were used. Several modelling approaches were considered including hybrid; tobit; panel and heteroscedastic models. First, models using C-TTO or DCE data were tested separately. Then possibility of combining the C-TTO and DCE data was examined. Hybrid models were tested if it was sensible to combine both types of data. The best-performing model was selected based on both the consistency of the results produced and the degree to which models used all the available data. Results Data from 1200 respondents representing the general Vietnamese adult population were included in the analyses. Only the DCE Logit model and the regular Hybrid model that uses all available data produced consistent results. As the priority was to use all available data if possible, the hybrid model was selected to generate the Vietnamese value set. Mobility had the largest effect on health state values, followed by pain/discomfort, usual activities, anxiety/depression and self-care. The Vietnam values ranged from − 0.5115 to 1. Conclusion This is the first value set for EQ-5D-5L based on social preferences obtained from a nationally representative sample in Vietnam. The value set will likely play a key role in economic evaluations and health technology assessments in Vietnam.

Background Vietnam applied strict quarantine measures to mitigate the rapid transmission of the SARS-COV-2 virus. Central questions were how the COVID-19 pandemic affected health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of the Vietnamese general population, and whether there is any difference in HRQOL among people under different quarantine conditions. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted during 1 April– 30 May 2020 when the COVID-19 pandemic was at its peak in Vietnam. Data was collected via an online survey using Google survey tool. A convenient sampling approach was employed, with participants being sorted into three groups: people who were in government quarantine facilities; people who were under self-isolation at their own place; and the general population who did not need enforced quarantine. The Vietnamese EQ-5D-5L instrument was used to measure HRQOL. Differences in HRQOL among people of isolation groups and their socio-demographic characteristics were statistically tested. Results A final sample was made of 406 people, including 10 persons from government quarantine facilities, 57 persons under self-isolation at private places, and the rest were the general population. The mean EQ-VAS was reported the highest at 90.5 (SD: 7.98) among people in government quarantine facilities, followed by 88.54 (SD: 12.24) among general population and 86.54 (SD 13.69) among people in self-isolation group. The EQ-5D-5L value was reported the highest among general population at 0.95 (SD: 0.07), followed by 0.94 (SD: 0.12) among people in government quarantine facilities, and 0.93 (SD: 0.13) among people who did self-isolation. Overall, most people, at any level, reported having problems with anxiety and/or depression in all groups. Conclusion While there have been some worries and debates on implementing strict quarantine measures can hinder people’s quality of life, Vietnam showed an opposite tendency in people’s HRQOL even under the highest level of enforcement in the prevention and control of COVID-19.

Purpose This paper aims to analyze the household financial burden and poverty impacts of cancer treatment in Vietnam. Methods Under the “ASEAN CosTs in ONcology” study design, three major specialized cancer hospitals were employed to assemble the Vietnamese data. Factors of socioeconomic, direct, and indirect costs of healthcare were collected prospectively through both individual interviews and hospital financial records. Results The rates of catastrophic expenditure based on the cut-off points of 20%, 30%, 40%, and 50% of household's income were 82.6%, 73.7%, 64.7%, and 56.9%, respectively. 37.4% of the households with patient were impoverished by the treatment costs for cancer. The statistically significant correlates of the impoverishment problem were higher among older patients (40–60 years: 1.77, 95% CI 1.14–2.73; above 60 years: 1.75, 95% CI 1.03–2.98); poorer patients (less than 100% national income: 29, 95% CI 18.6–45.24; less than 200% national income: 2.89, 95% CI 1.69–4.93); patients who underwent surgery alone (receiving nonsurgery treatment: 2.46, 95% CI 1.32–4.59; receiving multiple treatments: 2.4, 95% CI 1.38–4.17). Conclusions Lots of households were pushed into poverty due to their expenditure on cancer care; more actions are urgently needed to improve financial protection to the vulnerable groups.