IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v85y2008i3p349-355.html

Health-related quality of life and beneficiaries of long-term care insurance in Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Imai, Hirohisa
  • Fujii, Yoshinori
  • Fukuda, Yoshiharu
  • Nakao, Hiroyuki
  • Yahata, Yuichiro

Abstract

Objectives A long-term care insurance (LTCI) system was introduced in 2000 in Japan. The clarification of information on the users and the ways in which services under this system have been utilized is essential for improving the system operation. This study was conducted for the purpose of clarifying what level of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) was achieved by individuals using the services under the LTCI system.Methods The subjects were inhabitants of two cities in the Kyushu district of Japan who were receiving daily home care services under the LTCI system. To analyze the relationships of the beneficiaries' HRQOL with their characteristics, the dependent variable was the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) scores adopted as an index of HRQOL, and the independent variables comprised the demographic features (gender, age, and living condition) of users receiving long-term care service as well as their opinions about fees for services, satisfaction with the services provided, and the degree of support/care required.Results The EQ-5D score was higher for females than for males and higher for the subjects living alone than for those displaying any other family composition. EQ-5D score decreased with an increase in the degree of support/care required. Multivariate analysis revealed that the degree of support/care required, gender and living condition were found to serve as variables that significantly contribute to utility.Conclusions Our analysis of the relationships between the characteristics of the LTCI beneficiaries and their HRQOL has yielded basic data that will be useful for improving the recently introduced LTCI system.

Suggested Citation

  • Imai, Hirohisa & Fujii, Yoshinori & Fukuda, Yoshiharu & Nakao, Hiroyuki & Yahata, Yuichiro, 2008. "Health-related quality of life and beneficiaries of long-term care insurance in Japan," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 349-355, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:85:y:2008:i:3:p:349-355
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168-8510(07)00195-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brooks, Richard AU -, 1996. "EuroQol: the current state of play," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 53-72, July.
    2. Aki Tsuchiya & Shunya Ikeda & Naoki Ikegami & Shuzo Nishimura & Ikuro Sakai & Takashi Fukuda & Chisato Hamashima & Akinori Hisashige & Makoto Tamura, 2002. "Estimating an EQ‐5D population value set: the case of Japan," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 341-353, June.
    3. Kurimori, Sugako & Fukuda, Yoshiharu & Nakamura, Keiko & Watanabe, Masafumi & Takano, Takehito, 2006. "Calculation of prefectural disability-adjusted life expectancy (DALE) using long-term care prevalence and its socioeconomic correlates in Japan," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 346-358, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:plo:pone00:0213386 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Han Hu & Zhao Zhang, 2022. "Long-Term Care Services and Insurance System in China: An Evolutionary Game Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-22, December.
    3. Kyusuk Chung & Jun Hyup Lee, 2012. "A decomposition of income-related inequality in EQ-5D: a South Korea study," International Journal of Public Policy, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1/2/3), pages 53-68.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bansback, Nick & Brazier, John & Tsuchiya, Aki & Anis, Aslam, 2012. "Using a discrete choice experiment to estimate health state utility values," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 306-318.
    2. Garry R. Barton & Tracey H. Sach & Anthony J. Avery & Claire Jenkinson & Michael Doherty & David K. Whynes & Kenneth R. Muir, 2008. "A comparison of the performance of the EQ‐5D and SF‐6D for individuals aged ≥ 45 years," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(7), pages 815-832, July.
    3. L. M. Lamers & J. McDonnell & P. F. M. Stalmeier & P. F. M. Krabbe & J. J. V. Busschbach, 2006. "The Dutch tariff: results and arguments for an effective design for national EQ‐5D valuation studies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(10), pages 1121-1132, October.
    4. Samer A. Kharroubi & Yara Beyh & Marwa Diab El Harake & Dalia Dawoud & Donna Rowen & John Brazier, 2020. "Examining the Feasibility and Acceptability of Valuing the Arabic Version of SF-6D in a Lebanese Population," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-15, February.
    5. Abeer Rabayah & Bram Roudijk & Fredrick Dermawan Purba & Fanni Rencz & Saad Jaddoua & Uwe Siebert, 2025. "Valuation of the EQ-5D-3L in Jordan," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 26(3), pages 487-501, April.
    6. Michaël Schwarzinger & Jean‐Louis Lanoë & Erik Nord & Isabelle Durand‐Zaleski, 2004. "Lack of multiplicative transitivity in person trade‐off responses," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(2), pages 171-181, February.
    7. Leida M. Lamers & Peep F. M. Stalmeier & Paul F. M. Krabbe & Jan J. V. Busschbach, 2006. "Inconsistencies in TTO and VAS Values for EQ-5D Health States," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 26(2), pages 173-181, March.
    8. Feng Xie & A. Pickard & Paul Krabbe & Dennis Revicki & Rosalie Viney & Nancy Devlin & David Feeny, 2015. "A Checklist for Reporting Valuation Studies of Multi-Attribute Utility-Based Instruments (CREATE)," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(8), pages 867-877, August.
    9. Mônica Viegas Andrade & Kenya Noronha & Paul Kind & Carla de Barros Reis & Lucas Resende de Carvalho, 2016. "Logical Inconsistencies in 3 Preference Elicitation Methods for EQ-5D Health States," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(2), pages 242-252, February.
    10. P. Wang & M. Li & G. Liu & J. Thumboo & N. Luo, 2015. "Do Chinese have similar health-state preferences? A comparison of mainland Chinese and Singaporean Chinese," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(8), pages 857-863, November.
    11. Rand, Stacey E. & Malley, Juliette & Netten, Ann, 2012. "Measuring the social care outcomes of informal carers: an interim technical report for the Identifying the Impact of Social Care (IIASC) study," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 47520, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Birch, Stephen & Gafni, Amiram, 2003. "Economics and the evaluation of health care programmes: generalisability of methods and implications for generalisability of results," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 207-219, May.
    13. Conner-Spady, Barbara L. & Sanmartin, Claudia & Johnston, Geoffrey H. & McGurran, John J. & Kehler, Melissa & Noseworthy, Tom W., 2011. "The importance of patient expectations as a determinant of satisfaction with waiting times for hip and knee replacement surgery," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(3), pages 245-252, August.
    14. Mathieu F. Janssen & Ines Buchholz & Dominik Golicki & Gouke J. Bonsel, 2022. "Is EQ-5D-5L Better Than EQ-5D-3L Over Time? A Head-to-Head Comparison of Responsiveness of Descriptive Systems and Value Sets from Nine Countries," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(11), pages 1081-1093, November.
    15. Busschbach, Jan J. V. & McDonnell, Joseph & Essink-Bot, Marie-Louise & van Hout, Ben A., 1999. "Estimating parametric relationships between health description and health valuation with an application to the EuroQol EQ-5D," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 551-570, October.
    16. Böckerman, Petri & Johansson, Edvard & Saarni, Samuli I., 2011. "Do established health-related quality-of-life measures adequately capture the impact of chronic conditions on subjective well-being?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 91-95, April.
    17. McTaggart-Cowan, H & Brazier, J & Tsuchiya, A, 2008. "Combining Rasch and cluster analysis: a novel method for developing rheumatoid arthritis states for use in valuation studies," MPRA Paper 29834, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Al-Janabi, Hareth & Keeley, Thomas & Mitchell, Paul & Coast, Joanna, 2013. "Can capabilities be self-reported? A think aloud study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 116-122.
    19. Munir A. Khan & Jeff Richardson, 2019. "Is the Validity of Cost Utility Analysis Improved When Utility is Measured by an Instrument with ‘Home-Country’ Weights? Evidence from Six Western Countries," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 145(1), pages 1-15, August.
    20. John Brazier & Jennifer Roberts & Aki Tsuchiya & Jan Busschbach, 2004. "A comparison of the EQ‐5D and SF‐6D across seven patient groups," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(9), pages 873-884, September.

    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:eee:hepoli:v:85:y:2008:i:3:p:349-355. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    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.