Valuing health-related quality of life in heart failure: a systematic review of methods to derive quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in trial-based cost-utility analyses.

The accurate measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and the value of improving it for patients are essential for deriving quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) to inform treatment choice and resource allocation. The objective of this review was to identify and describe the approaches used to measure and value change in HRQoL in trial-based economic evaluations of heart failure interventions which derive QALYs as an outcome. Three databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane) were systematically searched. Twenty studies reporting economic evaluations based on 18 individual trials were identified. Most studies (n = 17) utilised generic preference-based measures to describe HRQoL and derive QALYs, commonly the EQ-5D-3L. Of these, three studies (from the same trial) also used mapping from a condition-specific to a generic measure. The remaining three studies used patients' direct valuation of their own health or physician-reported outcomes to derive QALYs. Only 7 of the 20 studies reported significant incremental QALY gains. Most interventions were reported as being likely to be cost-effective at specified willingness to pay thresholds. The substantial variation in the approach applied to derive QALYs in the measurement of and value attributed to HRQoL in heart failure requires further investigation.

Patient preferences for the delivery of cardiac rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE: To elicit patients' preferences for cardiac rehabilitation(CR). METHODS: A Discrete Choice Experiment was used to quantify patients' preferences for the delivery of CR. This survey-based method elicited the relative importance of different characteristics of a program. RESULTS: 200 in-patients eligible to attend CR completed the survey. Over half of the patients strongly preferred a centre-based compared to a home-based program. Many but not all preferred a program starting within two rather than six weeks of discharge and exercise delivered in a group rather than individual setting, with exercise via the internet using telehealth strongly disliked. Some respondents preferred lifestyle information delivered one-to-one by a health professional, and there was an overall preference against delivery by smart phone Apps. Some preferred a program out of rather than within working hours and a shorter program (four weeks compared to eight weeks). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides further insight into patient preferences for a CR program. Although the strongest preferences were for centre-based programs with healthcare professionals facilitating exercise classes and one-on-one education, it is important to offer flexible delivery as one approach will not suit everyone. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: There is the potential to improve CR programs by focusing on patient preferences.