IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v25y2024i5d10.1007_s10198-023-01625-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating the monetary value of a Quality-Adjusted Life-Year in Quebec

Author

Listed:
  • Christian R. C. Kouakou

    (University of Sherbrooke
    Centre de Recherche de l’Institut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Montréal, CIUSSS de l’Est de l’Île de Montréal)

  • Jie He

    (University of Sherbrooke)

  • Thomas G. Poder

    (Centre de Recherche de l’Institut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Montréal, CIUSSS de l’Est de l’Île de Montréal
    University of Montreal)

Abstract

Background The value of a Quality-Adjusted Life-Year (QALY) is of great importance for the healthcare system. It helps when it comes to defining a cost-effectiveness threshold for the evaluation of health technologies. No willingness-to-pay value for a QALY exists in the province of Quebec, Canada. Objectives In this paper, we empirically investigated the monetary value of a QALY for the population of Quebec. Methods Based on the Short-Form 6-Dimension version 2 (SF-6Dv2), we conducted an online survey with a representative adult sample living in Quebec. We used a time trade-off (TTO) combined with contingent valuation (CV), and a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to assess both the population’s willingness to pay (WTP) for one QALY and the marginal WTP for health attributes. A health utility algorithm using hybrid regression was developed to determine a preference-based value set for health states. Results Main analysis was conducted on 993 answers for the CV and 2143 answers for the DCE. The willingness-to-pay per QALY varied from CA$ 47,048.84 (CI: 21,554.38; 72,543.30) for CV to CA$ 73,936.87 (CI: 63,105.40; 84,768.35) for DCE. Among the 6 dimensions of the SF-6Dv2, marginal WTP varied from CA$ 4499.15 (CI: 2975.06; 6023.25) for more role accomplishment in daily activities to CA$ 15,867.12 (CI: 13,825.75; 17,908.49) for less pain. Robustness check with multiple alternative samples, as well as alternative health utility algorithms, showed that the results were robust and the DCE method provided 50% larger results than the CV method, although confidence intervals overlap. Conclusion This paper provides useful information for decision-makers on the monetary value of a QALY in Quebec.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian R. C. Kouakou & Jie He & Thomas G. Poder, 2024. "Estimating the monetary value of a Quality-Adjusted Life-Year in Quebec," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(5), pages 787-811, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:25:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s10198-023-01625-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-023-01625-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-023-01625-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-023-01625-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zawojska, Ewa & Bartczak, Anna & Czajkowski, Mikołaj, 2019. "Disentangling the effects of policy and payment consequentiality and risk attitudes on stated preferences," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 63-84.
    2. Katherine Needham & Nick Hanley, 2020. "Prior knowledge, familiarity and stated policy consequentiality in contingent valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, January.
    3. Dorte Gyrd‐Hansen, 2003. "Willingness to pay for a QALY," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(12), pages 1049-1060, December.
    4. Johansson,Per-Olov, 1991. "An Introduction to Modern Welfare Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521356954, September.
    5. Mark Oppe & Kim Rand-Hendriksen & Koonal Shah & Juan M. Ramos‐Goñi & Nan Luo, 2016. "EuroQol Protocols for Time Trade-Off Valuation of Health Outcomes," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(10), pages 993-1004, October.
    6. Richard G. Walsh & John B. Loomis & Richard A. Gillman, 1984. "Valuing Option, Existence, and Bequest Demands for Wilderness," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 60(1), pages 14-29.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Meles, Tensay Hadush & Lokina, Razack & Mtenga, Erica Louis & Tibanywana, Julieth Julius, 2023. "Stated preferences with survey consequentiality and outcome uncertainty: A split sample discrete choice experiment," EfD Discussion Paper 23-16, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    2. Zawojska, Ewa & Gastineau, Pascal & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre & Cheze, Benoit & Paris, Anthony, 2021. "Measuring policy consequentiality perceptions in stated preference surveys," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313977, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Christian R. C. Kouakou & Thomas G. Poder, 2022. "Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: a systematic review with meta-regression," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(2), pages 277-299, March.
    4. Tensay Hadush Meles & Razack Lokina & Erica Louis Mtenga & Julieth Julius Tibanywana, 2023. "Stated Preferences with Survey Consequentiality and Outcome Uncertainty: A Split Sample Discrete Choice Experiment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 86(4), pages 717-754, December.
    5. Sergio Colombo & Wiktor Budziński & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Klaus Glenk, 2022. "The relative performance of ex‐ante and ex‐post measures to mitigate hypothetical and strategic bias in a stated preference study," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 845-873, September.
    6. Robin R. Jenkins & Dennis Guignet & Patrick J. Walsh, 2014. "Prevention, Cleanup, and Reuse Benefits from the Federal UST Program," NCEE Working Paper Series 201405, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Nov 2014.
    7. Nunes, P.A.L.D. & Nijkamp, P., 2011. "Biodiversity: Economic perspectives," Serie Research Memoranda 0002, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    8. Hougner, Cajsa & Colding, Johan & Soderqvist, Tore, 2006. "Economic valuation of a seed dispersal service in the Stockholm National Urban Park, Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 364-374, September.
    9. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Bernadeta Gołębiowska & Anna Bartczak & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2020. "Energy Demand Management and Social Norms," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-20, July.
    11. John, Kun H. & Youn, Yeo C. & Shin, Joon H., 2003. "Resolving conflicting ecological and economic interests in the Korean DMZ: a valuation based approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 173-179, August.
    12. O'Dell, Dallas & Contu, Davide & Shreedhar, Ganga, 2025. "Public support for degrowth policies and sufficiency behaviours in the United States: a discrete choice experiment," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126084, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Jen-Yu Amy Chang & Chien-Ning Hsu & Juan Manuel Ramos-Goñi & Nan Luo & Hsiang-Wen Lin & Fang-Ju Lin, 2024. "Beyond 10-year lead-times in EQ-5D-5L: leveraging alternative lead-times in willingness-to-accept questions to capture preferences for worse-than-dead states and their implication," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(6), pages 1041-1055, August.
    14. Manhique, Henrique & Wätzold, Frank, 2023. "Effects of Institutional Setting on Value Estimates of Stated Preference Surveys in Developing Economies: A Discrete Choice Experiment on Conserving Biodiversity in The Cape Floristic Region," MPRA Paper 118750, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Young, Ralph, 1991. "The Economic Significance of Environmental Resources: A Review of the Evidence," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 59(03), pages 1-26, December.
    16. Ryen, Linda & Svensson, Mikael, 2014. "The Willingness to Pay for a QALY: a Review of the Empirical Literature," Karlstad University Working Papers in Economics 12, Karlstad University, Department of Economics.
    17. Stefan A. Lipman & Liying Zhang & Koonal K. Shah & Arthur E. Attema, 2023. "Time and lexicographic preferences in the valuation of EQ-5D-Y with time trade-off methodology," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(2), pages 293-305, March.
    18. repec:dav:journl:y:2016:v:7:i:11:p:1272-1289 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Rösl, Gerhard & Seitz, Franz & Tödter, Karl-Heinz, 2017. "Doing away with cash? The welfare costs of abolishing cash," IMFS Working Paper Series 112, Goethe University Frankfurt, Institute for Monetary and Financial Stability (IMFS).
    20. Kevin Haninger & James K. Hammitt, 2011. "Diminishing Willingness to Pay per Quality‐Adjusted Life Year: Valuing Acute Foodborne Illness," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(9), pages 1363-1380, September.
    21. Ndebele, Tom & Forgie, Vicky, 2017. "Estimating the economic benefits of a wetland restoration programme in New Zealand: A contingent valuation approach," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 75-89.

    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:spr:eujhec:v:25:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s10198-023-01625-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.