首页> 外文期刊>Cost Effectiveness Resource Allocation >Do the Washington Panel recommendations hold for Europe: investigating the relation between quality of life versus work-status, absenteeism and presenteeism
【24h】

Do the Washington Panel recommendations hold for Europe: investigating the relation between quality of life versus work-status, absenteeism and presenteeism

机译:华盛顿州面板建议持有欧洲:调查生活质量与工作现状,缺勤和职位之间的关系

获取原文
       

摘要

The question of how to value lost productivity in economic evaluations has been subject of debate in the past twenty years. According to the Washington panel, lost productivity influences health-related quality of life and should thus be considered a health effect instead of a cost to avoid double counting. Current empirical evidence on the inclusion of income loss when valuing health states is not decisive. We examined the relationship between three aspects of lost productivity (work-status, absenteeism and presenteeism) and patient or social valuation of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Cross-sectional survey data were collected from a total of 830 respondents with a rheumatic disorder from four West-European countries. Health-related quality of life was expressed in either the European societal utility using EQ-5D-3L or the patient valuation using EQ-VAS. The impact of work-status (four categories), absenteeism (absent from paid work during the past three months), and presenteeism (QQ method) on EQ-5D utilities and VAS scores was examined in linear regression analyses taking into account demographic characteristics and disease severity (duration, pain and restriction). The relationship between work-status, absenteeism or presenteeism and HRQoL was stronger for patient valuation than societal valuation. Compared to work-status and presenteeism the relationship between absenteeism and HRQoL was even less explicit. However, results for all measures of lost productivity are only marginally significant and negligible compared to the influence of disease-related restrictions. This survey study in patients with a rheumatic disorder in four European countries, does not fully support the Washington panel's claim that lost productivity is a significantly related with HRQoL, and this is even more apparent for absenteeism than for work-status and presenteeism. For West-European countries, there is no reason, to include absenteeism in the QALY. Findings need to be confirmed in other disease areas.
机译:如何在经济评估中损失生产效率的问题一直是过去二十年的辩论。根据华盛顿州的面板,损失的生产率影响与健康有关的生活质量,因此应该被视为健康效果而不是成本,以避免双重计数。当前关于估计卫生国家的收入损失的经验证据并不决定。我们审查了生产力失败的三个方面(工作现状,缺勤和职位)和患者或社会估值与健康有关的生活质量(HRQOL)之间的关系。从共有830名受访者收集横断面调查数据,其中四个西欧国家的风湿病疾病。使用EQ-5D-3L或使用EQ-VAS的患者估值,在欧洲社会效用中表达了与健康相关的生活质量。在考虑人口统计特征的线性回归分析中,研究了工作状态(过去三个月),缺勤(缺乏有偿工作),缺勤(缺席的工作),以及在eq-5d公用事业和VAS分数上的展示(QQ方法)的影响疾病严重程度(持续时间,疼痛和限制)。工作状况,缺勤或职务与HRQOL之间的关系比社会估值更强。与工作状况和出席相比,缺勤与HRQOL之间的关系更加明确。然而,与疾病相关限制的影响相比,所有损失的生产率衡量措施的结果均仅略微显着,并且可以忽略不计。这项调查研究在四个欧洲国家的风湿病疾病患者,并没有完全支持华盛顿州的主张,损失的生产力是与HRQOL有明显相关的,而且对于缺勤而言,这比工作状况和职业主义更为明显。对于西欧洲国家,没有理由,包括在突出的缺勤。需要在其他疾病区域确认调查结果。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号