Do Quality-Adjusted Life-Years Discriminate Against the Elderly? An Empirical Analysis of Published Cost-Effectiveness Analyses
Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc..
OBJECTIVES: Critics of quality-adjusted life-years argue that it discriminates against older individuals. However, little empirical evidence has been produced to inform this debate. This study aimed to compare published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) on patients aged ≥65 years and those aged <65 years.
METHODS: We used the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry to identify CEAs published in MEDLINE between 1976 and 2021. Eligible CEAs were categorized according to age (≥65 years vs <65 years). The distributions of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were compared between the age groups. We used logistic regression to assess the association between age groups and the cost-effectiveness conclusion adjusted for confounding factors. We conducted sensitivity analyses to explore the impact of mixed age and age-unknown groups and all ICERs from the same CEAs. Subgroup analyses were also conducted.
RESULTS: A total of 4445 CEAs categorized according to age <65 years (n = 3784) and age ≥65 years (n = 661) were included in the primary analysis. The distributions of ICERs and the likelihood of concluding that the intervention was cost-effective were similar between the 2 age groups. Adjusted odds ratios ranged from 1.132 (95% CI 0.930-1.377) to 1.248 (95% CI 0.970-1.606) (odds ratio >1 indicating that CEAs for age ≥65 years were more likely to conclude the intervention was cost-effective than those for age <65 years). Sensitivity and subgroup analyses found similar results.
CONCLUSION: Our analysis found no systematic differences in published ICERs using quality-adjusted life-years between CEAs for individuals aged ≥65 years and those for individuals aged <65 years.
Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
---|
Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
---|---|
Erschienen: |
2024 |
Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - year:2024 |
---|---|
Enthalten in: |
Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research - (2024) vom: 26. März |
Sprache: |
Englisch |
---|
Beteiligte Personen: |
Xie, Feng [VerfasserIn] |
---|
Links: |
---|
Themen: |
Age |
---|
Anmerkungen: |
Date Revised 16.04.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status Publisher |
---|
doi: |
10.1016/j.jval.2024.03.011 |
---|
funding: |
|
---|---|
Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM370377044 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | NLM370377044 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20240416232853.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 240330s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.jval.2024.03.011 |2 doi | |
028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1377.xml |
035 | |a (DE-627)NLM370377044 | ||
035 | |a (NLM)38548176 | ||
035 | |a (PII)S1098-3015(24)00126-8 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
100 | 1 | |a Xie, Feng |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Do Quality-Adjusted Life-Years Discriminate Against the Elderly? An Empirical Analysis of Published Cost-Effectiveness Analyses |
264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
500 | |a Date Revised 16.04.2024 | ||
500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
500 | |a Citation Status Publisher | ||
520 | |a Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc. | ||
520 | |a OBJECTIVES: Critics of quality-adjusted life-years argue that it discriminates against older individuals. However, little empirical evidence has been produced to inform this debate. This study aimed to compare published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) on patients aged ≥65 years and those aged <65 years | ||
520 | |a METHODS: We used the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry to identify CEAs published in MEDLINE between 1976 and 2021. Eligible CEAs were categorized according to age (≥65 years vs <65 years). The distributions of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were compared between the age groups. We used logistic regression to assess the association between age groups and the cost-effectiveness conclusion adjusted for confounding factors. We conducted sensitivity analyses to explore the impact of mixed age and age-unknown groups and all ICERs from the same CEAs. Subgroup analyses were also conducted | ||
520 | |a RESULTS: A total of 4445 CEAs categorized according to age <65 years (n = 3784) and age ≥65 years (n = 661) were included in the primary analysis. The distributions of ICERs and the likelihood of concluding that the intervention was cost-effective were similar between the 2 age groups. Adjusted odds ratios ranged from 1.132 (95% CI 0.930-1.377) to 1.248 (95% CI 0.970-1.606) (odds ratio >1 indicating that CEAs for age ≥65 years were more likely to conclude the intervention was cost-effective than those for age <65 years). Sensitivity and subgroup analyses found similar results | ||
520 | |a CONCLUSION: Our analysis found no systematic differences in published ICERs using quality-adjusted life-years between CEAs for individuals aged ≥65 years and those for individuals aged <65 years | ||
650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
650 | 4 | |a age | |
650 | 4 | |a cost-effectiveness analysis | |
650 | 4 | |a discrimination | |
650 | 4 | |a elderly | |
650 | 4 | |a quality-adjusted life-year | |
700 | 1 | |a Zhou, Ting |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Humphries, Brittany |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Neumann, Peter J |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research |d 1998 |g (2024) vom: 26. März |w (DE-627)NLM115934545 |x 1524-4733 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g year:2024 |g day:26 |g month:03 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.03.011 |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |j 2024 |b 26 |c 03 |