The EQ-HWB: Overview of the Development of a Measure of Health and Wellbeing and Key Results.

OBJECTIVES: Existing measures for estimating quality-adjusted life-years are mostly limited to health-related quality of life. This article presents an overview of the development the EQ-HWB (EQ Health and Wellbeing), which is a measure that encompasses health and wellbeing. METHODS: Stages: (1) Establishing domains through reviews of the qualitative literature informed by a conceptual framework. (2) Generation and selection of items to cover the domains. (3) Face validation of these items through qualitative interviews with 168 patients, social care users, general population, and carers across 6 countries (Argentina, Australia, China, Germany, United Kingdom, United States). (4) Extensive psychometric testing of candidate items (using classical, factor analysis, and item response theory methods) on > 4000 respondents in the 6 countries. Stakeholders were consulted throughout. RESULTS: A total of 32 subdomains grouped into 7 high-level domains were identified from the qualitative literature and 97 items generated to cover them. Face validation eliminated 36 items, modified 14, and added 3. Psychometric testing of 64 items found little difference in missing data or problems with response distribution, the conceptual model was confirmed except in China, and most items performed well in the item response theory in all countries. Evidence was presented to stakeholders in 2 rounds of consultation to inform the final selection of items for the EQ-HWB (25-item) and the short version of EQ-HWB (9-items). CONCLUSIONS: EQ-HWB measures have been developed internationally for evaluating interventions in health, public health, and social care including the impact on patients, social care users, and carers.

What is the best approach to adopt for identifying the domains for a new measure of health, social care and carer-related quality of life to measure quality-adjusted life years? Application to the development of the EQ-HWB?

Economic evaluation combines costs and benefits to support decision-making when assessing new interventions using preference-based measures to measure and value benefits in health or health-related quality of life. These health-focused instruments have limited ability to capture wider impacts on informal carers or outcomes in other sectors such as social care. Sector-specific instruments can be used but this is problematic when the impact of an intervention straddles different sectors.An alternative approach is to develop a generic preference-based measure that is sufficiently broad to capture important cross-sector outcomes. We consider the options for the selection of domains for a cross-sector generic measure including how to identify domains, who should provide information on the domains and how this should be framed. Beyond domain identification, considerations of criteria and stakeholder needs are also identified.This paper sets out the case for an approach that relies on the voice of patients, social care users and informal carers as the main source of domains and describes how the approach was operationalised in the 'Extending the QALY' project which developed the new measure, the EQ-HWB (EQ health and wellbeing instrument). We conclude by discussing the strengths and limitations of this approach. The new measure should be sufficiently generic to be used to consistently evaluate health and social care interventions, yet also sensitive enough to pick up important changes in quality of life in patients, social care users and carers.

Leveraging DICE (Discretely-Integrated Condition Event) Simulation to Simplify the Design and Implementation of Hybrid Models.

OBJECTIVES: Using an example of an existing model constructed by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to inform a real health technology assessment, this study seeks to demonstrate how a discretely integrated condition event (DICE) simulation can improve the implementation of Markov models. METHODS: Using the technical report and spreadsheet, the original model was translated to a standard DICE simulation without making any changes to the design. All original analyses were repeated and the results were compared. Aspects that could have improved the original design were then considered. RESULTS: The original model consisted of 32 copies (8 risk strata × 4 treatments) of the Markov structure, containing more than 6000 Microsoft Excel® formulas (18 MB files). Three aspects (nonadherence, scheduled treatment stop, and end of fracture risk) were handled by incorporating weighted averages into the cycle-specific calculations. The DICE implementation used 3 conditions to represent the states and a single transition event to apply the probabilities; 3 additional events processed the special aspects, and profiles handled the 8 strata (0.12 MB file). One replication took 16 seconds. The original results were reproduced but extensive additional sensitivity analyses, including structural analyses, were enabled. CONCLUSION: Implementing a real Markov model using DICE simulation both preserves the advantages of the approach and expands the available tools, improving transparency and ease of use and review.

A threshold analysis assessed the credibility of conclusions from network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the reliability of treatment recommendations based on network meta-analysis (NMA). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We consider evidence in an NMA to be potentially biased. Taking each pairwise contrast in turn, we use a structured series of threshold analyses to ask: (1) "How large would the bias in this evidence base have to be before it changed our decision?" and (2) "If the decision changed, what is the new recommendation?" We illustrate the method via two NMAs in which a Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment for NMAs has been implemented: weight loss and osteoporosis. RESULTS: Four of the weight-loss NMA estimates were assessed as "low" and six as "moderate" quality by GRADE; for osteoporosis, six were "low," nine were "moderate," and 1 was "high." The threshold analysis suggests plausible bias in 3 of 10 estimates in the weight-loss network could have changed the treatment recommendation. For osteoporosis, plausible bias in 6 of 16 estimates could change the recommendation. There was no relation between plausible bias changing a treatment recommendation and the original GRADE assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Reliability judgments on individual NMA contrasts do not help decision makers understand whether a treatment recommendation is reliable. Threshold analysis reveals whether the final recommendation is robust against plausible degrees of bias in the data.

Evidence informed decision making: the use of "colloquial evidence" at nice.

OBJECTIVES: Colloquial evidence (CE) has been described as the informal evidence that helps provide context to other forms of evidence in guidance development. Despite challenges around quality, and the potential biases, the use of CE is becoming increasingly important in assessments where scientific literature is sparse and to also capture the experience of all stakeholders in discussions, including that of experts and patients. We aimed to ascertain how CE was being used at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). METHODS: Relevant data corresponding to the use of CE was extracted from all NICE technical and process manuals by two reviewers and quality assured and analyzed by a third reviewer. This was considered in light of the results of a focused literature review and a combined checklist for quality assessment was developed. RESULTS: At NICE, CE is utilised across all guidance producing programmes and at all stages of development. CE could range from information from experts and patient/carers, grey literature (including evidence from websites and policy reports) and testimony from stakeholders through consultation. Six tools for critical appraisal of CE were available from the literature and a combined best practice checklist has been proposed. CONCLUSIONS: As decisions often need to be made in areas where there is a lack of published scientific evidence, CE is employed. Therefore to ensure its appropriateness the development of a validated CE data quality check-list to assist decision makers is essential and further research in this area is a priority.

Japanese Cancer Association Meeting UICC International session--what is cost-effectiveness in cancer treatment?

The Japan National Committee for the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) and UICC-Asia Regional Office (ARO) organized an international session as part of the official program of the 72nd Annual Meeting of the Japanese Cancer Association to discuss the topic "What is cost-effectiveness in cancer treatment? " Healthcare economics are an international concern and a key issue for the UICC. The presenters and participants discussed the question of how limited medical resources can be best used to support life, which is a question that applies to both developing and industrialized countries, given that cancer treatment is putting medical systems under increasing strain. The emergence of advanced yet hugely expensive drugs has prompted discussion on methodologies for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) that seek to quantify cost and effect. The session benefited from the participation of various stakeholders, including representatives of industry, government and academia and three speakers from the Republic of Korea, an Asian country where discussion on HTA methodologies is already advanced. In addition, the session was joined by a representative of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) of the United Kingdom, which has pioneered the concept of cost-effectiveness in a medical context. The aim of the session was to advance and deepen understanding of the issue of cost-effectiveness as viewed from medical care systems in different regions.

Should we invest in environmental interventions to encourage physical activity in England? An economic appraisal.

BACKGROUND: The Department of Health in England asked the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) to develop guidance on environmental interventions that promote physical activity. The economic appraisals summarized in this study informed the development of that guidance. In view of the difficulties inherent in applying conventional health economic evaluation techniques to public health interventions, the economic appraisal employed a multi-faceted approach. METHODS: The analyses comprised of three components. Two cost-utility analyses; the first used a life-time disease progression model which sought to take into account the long-term benefits of physical activity on health outcomes, whereas the second used data from a regression analysis which captured some of the short-term, process benefits of physical activity which might manifest themselves in terms of improved mental health and wellbeing. The third approach was a cost-benefit analysis that took into account benefits beyond healthcare. RESULTS: The cost-utility approaches generated cost-effectiveness estimates ranging between £100 and £10 000 per QALY depending on the level of effectiveness of the intervention and the proportion of the intervention cost that was deemed to be attributable to health. The standardized cost-benefit ratio was 11:1. CONCLUSION: The findings present a consistent case to support environmental interventions that promote increased physical activity in the sedentary adult population. However, some degree of caution should be taken in interpreting the findings due to the limitations of the evidence upon which they are based. Further consideration should also be given to the relative merits of alternative approaches to assessing the value of changes to the built environment that might also benefit health as a positive externality.

Cost-effective public health guidance: asking questions from the decision-maker's viewpoint.

In February 2004, in his assessment of the long-term financial viability of the NHS, Derek Wanless recommended the use of 'a consistent framework, such as the methodology developed by NICE, to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of interventions and initiatives across health care and public health'. One year later public health was added to NICE's remit and the new National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) was established, with amended statutory instruments to permit consideration of broader public sector costs when developing cost-effective guidance for public health. With the principle of 'a consistent framework' put forward by Wanless as the starting point, this paper provides an insight into the most challenging aspects of applying the principles of cost-effectiveness analysis in the public health context from the policymaker's perspective. It reflects on the long-term consequences of taking on responsibility for producing public health guidance on the Institute's overall approach to guidance development and describes the tension between striving for consistency and cross-evaluation comparability while ensuring that the methodological tools used are fit for the purpose of developing public health guidance.

The development of a simulation model of primary prevention strategies for coronary heart disease.

This paper describes the present state of development of a discrete-event micro-simulation model for coronary heart disease prevention. The model is intended to support health policy makers in assessing the impacts on health care resources of different primary prevention strategies. For each person, a set of times to disease events, conditional on the individual's risk factor profile, is sampled from a set of probability distributions that are derived from a new analysis of the Framingham cohort study on coronary heart disease. Methods used to model changes in behavioural and physiological risk factors are discussed and a description of the simulation logic is given. The model incorporates POST (Patient Oriented Simulation Technique) simulation routines.