Value in health regional issues · 2022
Incorporating Concern for Health Equity Into Resource Allocation Decisions: Development of a Tool and Population-Based Valuation for Uganda.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yang Fan, Katumba Kenneth R, Greco Giulia, Seeley Janet, Ekirapa-Kiracho Elizabeth, Revill Paul, Griffin Susan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Health economic analyses that simultaneously address the concerns of increasing population health and reducing health inequalities require information on public preferences for using healthcare resources to reduce health inequalities and how this is valued relative to improving total population health. Previous research has quantified this preference in the form of an inequality aversion parameter in a specified social welfare function. This study aimed to elicit general population's views on health inequality and to estimate an inequality aversion parameter in Uganda.
METHODS: Adult respondents from the general population were recruited and interviewed using survey adapted from an existing questionnaire, including trade-off questions between 2 hypothetical healthcare programs. Data on participants' demographic and socioeconomic characteristics and health-related quality of life measured by 5-level version of EQ-5D were collected.
RESULTS: A nationally representative sample of 165 participants were included, with mean age of 37.1 years and mean 5-level version of EQ-5D at 0.836. Most respondents indicated willingness to trade-off some total population health to reduce health inequality. Translating the preferences into an Atkinson inequality aversion parameter (14.70) implies that health gain to the poorest 20% of people should be given approximately 6 times the weight of health gains to the richest 20%.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests it is feasible to adapt questionnaires of this type for a Ugandan population and this approach could be used to measure public aversion to health inequality in other settings. The elicited inequality aversion parameter can be used to support the assessment of health inequality impact in economic evaluation in Uganda.
METHODS: Adult respondents from the general population were recruited and interviewed using survey adapted from an existing questionnaire, including trade-off questions between 2 hypothetical healthcare programs. Data on participants' demographic and socioeconomic characteristics and health-related quality of life measured by 5-level version of EQ-5D were collected.
RESULTS: A nationally representative sample of 165 participants were included, with mean age of 37.1 years and mean 5-level version of EQ-5D at 0.836. Most respondents indicated willingness to trade-off some total population health to reduce health inequality. Translating the preferences into an Atkinson inequality aversion parameter (14.70) implies that health gain to the poorest 20% of people should be given approximately 6 times the weight of health gains to the richest 20%.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests it is feasible to adapt questionnaires of this type for a Ugandan population and this approach could be used to measure public aversion to health inequality in other settings. The elicited inequality aversion parameter can be used to support the assessment of health inequality impact in economic evaluation in Uganda.