IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/hecopl/v20y2025i4p409-421_7.html

Including carer health-related quality of life in NICE health technology assessments in the United Kingdom

Author

Listed:
  • Kanters, Tim A.
  • van Hezik-Wester, Valérie
  • Boateng, Andy
  • Cranmer, Holly
  • Kvamme, Ingelin
  • Santi, Irene
  • Al-Janabi, Hareth
  • van Exel, Job

Abstract

The impact of health technologies may extend beyond the patient and affect the health of people in their network, like their informal carers. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) methods guide explicitly allows the inclusion of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) effects on carers in economic evaluations when these effects are substantial, but the proportion of NICE appraisals that includes carer HRQoL remains small. This paper discusses when inclusion of carer HRQoL is justified, how inclusion can be substantiated, and how carer HRQoL can be measured and included in health economic models. Inclusion of HRQoL in economic evaluations can best be substantiated by data collected in (carers for) patients eligible for receiving the intervention. To facilitate combining patient and carer utilities on the benefit side of economic evaluations, using EQ-5D to measure impacts on carers seems the most successful strategy in the UK context. Alternatives to primary data collection of EQ-5D include vignette studies, using existing values, and mapping algorithms. Carer HRQoL was most often incorporated in economic models in NICE appraisals by employing (dis)utilities as a function of the patient's health state or disease severity. For consistency and comparability, economic evaluations including carer HRQoL should present analyses with and without carer HRQoL.

Suggested Citation

  • Kanters, Tim A. & van Hezik-Wester, Valérie & Boateng, Andy & Cranmer, Holly & Kvamme, Ingelin & Santi, Irene & Al-Janabi, Hareth & van Exel, Job, 2025. "Including carer health-related quality of life in NICE health technology assessments in the United Kingdom," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 409-421, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:20:y:2025:i:4:p:409-421_7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744133124000124/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:20:y:2025:i:4:p:409-421_7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/hep .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.