Acceptability of less than perfect health states
Health normally deteriorates beyond a certain age. This means, in Amartya Sen's terms, that one's health capabilities decline beyond a certain age, making it more difficult to achieve functionings such as mobility or sexual activity. In this paper, we investigate whether this normal reduction in quality of life also induces less than perfect health states to be considered acceptable at advanced stages of life. In other words, we investigate whether it is considered acceptable that health capabilities decline over time. In this study, we use domain-specific descriptions of health (mostly following the EQ-5D domains) in order to investigate whether the acceptability of less than perfect health states is similar for all types of health losses. Besides a theoretical consideration of this issue, we present some empirical evidence based on the answers of 226 respondents to a web-based survey. The results show that often individuals do indeed consider less than perfect health states acceptable, especially at more advanced stages of life. Mild health problems are more often considered acceptable than severe health problems. The acceptability of health states is related to the quality of life score of these states, i.e., worse states are considered less acceptable. This may have implications for the allocation of scarce health care resources.
Volume (Year): 60 (2005)
Issue (Month): 2 (January)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Cookson, Richard & Dolan, Paul, 1999. "Public views on health care rationing: a group discussion study," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1-2), pages 63-74, September.
- Brouwer, Werner B. F. & Koopmanschap, Marc A., 2000. "On the economic foundations of CEA. Ladies and gentlemen, take your positions!," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 439-459, July.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979.
"Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk,"
Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
- Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
- Williams, Alan & Cookson, Richard, 2000. "Equity in health," Handbook of Health Economics,in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 35, pages 1863-1910 Elsevier.
- Erik Nord & Jose Luis Pinto & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel & Peter Ubel, 1999. "Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 25-39.
- Bleichrodt, Han & Herrero, Carmen & Pinto, Jose Luis, 2002. "A proposal to solve the comparability problem in cost-utility analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 397-403, May.
- Paul Kind & Geoffrey Hardman & Susan Macran, 1999. "UK population norms for EQ-5D," Working Papers 172chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)