» Articles » PMID: 21224742

Willingness to Pay Per Quality-adjusted Life Year: is One Threshold Enough for Decision-making?: Results from a Study in Patients with Chronic Prostatitis

Overview
Journal Med Care
Specialty Health Services
Date 2011 Jan 13
PMID 21224742
Citations 25
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To estimate the willingness to pay (WTP) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) ratio with the stated preference data and compare the results obtained between chronic prostatitis (CP) patients and general population (GP).

Methods: WTP per QALY was calculated with the subjects' own health-related utility and the WTP value. Two widely used preference-based health-related quality of life instruments, EuroQol (EQ-5D) and Short Form 6D (SF-6D), were used to elicit utility for participants' own health. The monthly WTP values for moving from participants' current health to a perfect health were elicited using closed-ended iterative bidding contingent valuation method.

Results: A total of 268 CP patients and 364 participants from GP completed the questionnaire. We obtained 4 WTP/QALY ratios ranging from $4700 to $7400, which is close to the lower bound of local gross domestic product per capita, a threshold proposed by World Health Organization. Nevertheless, these values were lower than other proposed thresholds and published empirical researches on diseases with mortality risk. Furthermore, the WTP/QALY ratios from the GP were significantly lower than those from the CP patients, and different determinants were associated with the within group variation identified by multiple linear regression.

Conclusions: Preference elicitation methods are acceptable and feasible in the socio-cultural context of an Asian environment and the calculation of WTP/QALY ratio produced meaningful answers. The necessity of considering the QALY type or disease-specific QALY in estimating WTP/QALY ratio was highlighted and 1 to 3 times of gross domestic product/capita recommended by World Health Organization could potentially serve as a benchmark for threshold in this Asian context.

Citing Articles

A systematic review on the direct approach to elicit the demand-side cost-effectiveness threshold: Implications for low- and middle-income countries.

Nu Vu A, Van Hoang M, Lindholm L, Sahlen K, Nguyen C, Sun S PLoS One. 2024; 19(2):e0297450.

PMID: 38329955 PMC: 10852300. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0297450.


Establishing cost-effectiveness threshold in China: a community survey of willingness to pay for a healthylife year.

Xu L, Chen M, Angell B, Jiang Y, Howard K, Jan S BMJ Glob Health. 2024; 9(1).

PMID: 38195152 PMC: 10806867. DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2023-013070.


Estimating the cost-effectiveness threshold of advanced non-small cell lung cancer in China using mean opportunity cost and contingent valuation method.

Peng Q, Yin Y, Liang M, Zhao M, Shao T, Tang Y Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2023; 21(1):80.

PMID: 37915053 PMC: 10621116. DOI: 10.1186/s12962-023-00487-z.


Determination of a cost-effectiveness threshold for cancer interventions in Iran.

Safari H, Poder T, Afshari S, Nahvijou A, Arab-Zozani M, Moradi N Front Oncol. 2022; 12:1039589.

PMID: 36578935 PMC: 9791211. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1039589.


Willingness to Pay for One Additional Quality Adjusted Life Year: A Population Based Survey from China.

Ye Z, Abduhilil R, Huang J, Sun L Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2022; 20(6):893-904.

PMID: 35934772 PMC: 9358064. DOI: 10.1007/s40258-022-00750-z.