Eliciting a monetary threshold for a year of sufficient capability to inform resource allocation decisions in public health and social care

Kinghorn, Philip; Afentou, Nafsika

doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113977

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Considering the results for YFC, the estimated ICER for the SMS + ERS vs. UC comparison is €108478/QALY, which is above the YFC threshold range, 33 whereas the ICER for the SMS + ERS vs. ERS comparison is €8571, which is below the YFC threshold range, making this option highly cost-effective. The likelihood of SMS + ERS being cost-effective ranges between 39% and 41% in the comparison with UC and between 91% and 92% in the comparison with ERS ( table 1 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cost-effectiveness of a programme to address sedentary behaviour in older adults: results from the SITLESS RCT

Deidda

Coll‐Planas

Tully

et al. 2022

European Journal of Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study details the within-trial economic evaluation and long-term economic model of SITLESS, a multi-country, three-armed randomized controlled trial comparing a combined intervention of exercise referral schemes (ERS) enhanced by self-management strategies (SMS) against ERS alone and usual care (UC). Methods A cost-utility analysis, conducted from the base-case perspective of the National Health Service and personal and social services, estimated the incremental cost per incremental quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and years in full capability (YFC). A secondary analysis combined the costs with a broad set of outcomes within a cost-consequence framework, from a societal perspective. A Markov-type decision-analytic model was developed to project short-term changes in physical activity to long-term outcomes and costs, over a 5- and 15-year time horizon. Results The results of the within-trial analysis show that SMS+ERS is highly likely to be cost-effective compared to ERS alone (ICER €4270/QALY), but not compared to UC. Participants allocated to the SMS+ERS group also showed an improvement in YFC compared to ERS alone and UC. The long-term analysis revealed that SMS+ERS is likely to be a cost-effective option compared to ERS and UC over a 5-year, but not with a 15-year horizon, being then dominated by ERS alone. Conclusion This research provides new evidence that SMS is a cost-effective add-on to ERS strategies. This economic evaluation informs the case for further, cost-effective, refinement of lifestyle change programmes targeted to older adults, with the aim of ultimately reducing the impact of non-communicable diseases in this population.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The cost/YFC ICER was compared against the £33 500–£36 150 threshold range estimated by Kinghorn and colleagues. 33 …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effectiveness of a programme to address sedentary behaviour in older adults: results from the SITLESS RCT

Deidda

Coll‐Planas

Tully

et al. 2022

European Journal of Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… a Adult population estimates are for 2020 from the relevant national statistics authorities in the respective countries [ 30 – 32 ] b ICECAP-A score on a 0–1 no capability-full capability scale [ 27 ] c YFC, Years of full capability = 1 when ICECAP-A score is 1 for a full year and 0 when ICECAP-A score is 0 for a full year [ 29 ] d UK societal willingness to pay for a YFC[ 33 ] (£33,500) and OECD 2020 purchasing power parity adjusted estimates for Australia (AUD$70,475) and the Netherlands (€37,025) [ 34 ] …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…d UK societal willingness to pay for a YFC[ 33 ] (£33,500) and OECD 2020 purchasing power parity adjusted estimates for Australia (AUD$70,475) and the Netherlands (€37,025) [ 34 ]…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Estimating loss in capability wellbeing in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study of the general adult population in the UK, Australia and the Netherlands

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To estimate capability wellbeing lost from the general adult populations in the UK, Australia and the Netherlands in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated social restrictions, including lockdowns. Design Cross-sectional with recalled timepoints. Setting Online panels in the UK, Australia and the Netherlands conducted in February 2021 (data collected 26 January–2 March 2021). Participants Representative general adult (≥ 18 years old) population samples in the UK (n = 1,017), Australia (n = 1,011) and the Netherlands (n = 1,017) Main outcome measure Participants completed the ICECAP-A capability wellbeing measure in February 2021, and for two recalled timepoints during the initial lockdowns in April 2020 and in February 2020 (prior to COVID-19 restrictions in all three countries). ICECAP-A scores on a 0–1 no capability–full capability scale were calculated for each timepoint. Societal willingness to pay estimates for a year of full capability (YFC) was used to place a monetary value associated with change in capability per person and per country. Paired t tests were used to compare changes in ICECAP-A and YFC from pre- to post-COVID-19-related restrictions in each country. Results Mean (standard deviation) loss of capability wellbeing during the initial lockdown was 0.100 (0.17) in the UK, 0.074 (0.17) in Australia and 0.049 (0.12) in the Netherlands. In February 2021, losses compared to pre-lockdown were 0.043 (0.14) in the UK, 0.022 (0.13) in Australia and 0.006 (0.11) in the Netherlands. In monetary terms, these losses were equivalent to £14.8 billion, AUD$8.6 billion and €2.1 billion lost per month in April 2020 and £6.4 billion, A$2.6 billion and €260 million per month in February 2021 for the UK, Australia and the Netherlands, respectively. Conclusions There were substantial losses in capability wellbeing in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Future research is required to understand the specific impact of particular COVID-19 restrictions on people’s capabilities.

show abstract

From Health to Well-Being: Toward a Monetary Valuation of a Well-Being-Adjusted Life-Year

Brinkmann,

Stargardt,

Brouwer

2024

Value in Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eliciting a monetary threshold for a year of sufficient capability to inform resource allocation decisions in public health and social care

Cited by 11 publications

References 17 publications

Cost-effectiveness of a programme to address sedentary behaviour in older adults: results from the SITLESS RCT

Cost-effectiveness of a programme to address sedentary behaviour in older adults: results from the SITLESS RCT

Estimating loss in capability wellbeing in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study of the general adult population in the UK, Australia and the Netherlands

From Health to Well-Being: Toward a Monetary Valuation of a Well-Being-Adjusted Life-Year

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About