QALYs and capabilities: a comment on Cookson

Estimating conversion rates: A new empirical strategy with an application to health care in Italy

This study proposes a new empirical strategy for assessing how "efficient" different individuals and groups are in converting their available resources into achievements. Following the capabilities approach, pioneered by Amartya Sen, we employ the concept of "conversion rates" to capture the efficiency of the link from resources to achievements. The methodology is both simpler and more conceptually precise than previous options, this offering the potential to support significant expanded work in this area. The proposed methodology is then tested in relation to health care in Italy. The findings suggest that investments in education may carry particular health benefits for women, which public resources are particularly important for the elderly, and that single individuals pose special challenges because they benefit less from all types of resources than married couples. The results thus highlight significant heterogeneities in the abilities of different groups to convert public, private, and nonfinancial resources into health, and we conclude by noting the possible consequences for health care and public policies.

Reconciling ethical and economic conceptions of value in health policy using the capabilities approach: A qualitative investigation of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing

When evaluating new morally complex health technologies, policy decision-makers consider a broad range of different evaluations, which may include the technology's clinical effectiveness, cost effectiveness, and social or ethical implications. This type of holistic assessment is challenging, because each of these evaluations may be grounded in different and potentially contradictory assumptions about the technology's value. One such technology where evaluations conflict is Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT). Cost-effectiveness evaluations of NIPT often assess NIPT's ability to deliver on goals (i.e preventing the birth of children with disabilities) that social and ethical analyses suggest it should not have. Thus, cost effectiveness analyses frequently contradict social and ethical assessments of NIPT's value. We use the case of NIPT to explore how economic evaluations using a capabilities approach may be able to capture a broader, more ethical view of the value of NIPT. The capabilities approach is an evaluative framework which bases wellbeing assessments on a person's abilities, rather than their expressed preferences. It is linked to extra-welfarist approaches in health economic assessment. Beginning with Nussbaum's capability framework, we conducted a directed qualitative content analysis of interview data collected in 2014 from 27 Canadian women with personal experience of NIPT. We found that eight of Nussbaum's ten capabilities related to options, states, or choices that women valued in the context of NIPT, and identified one new capability. Our findings suggest that women value NIPT for its ability to provide more and different choices in the prenatal care pathway, and that a capabilities approach can indeed capture the value of NIPT in a way that goes beyond measuring health outcomes of ambiguous social and ethical value. More broadly, the capabilities approach may serve to resolve contradictions between ethical and economic evaluations of health technologies, and contribute to extra-welfarist approaches in the assessment of morally complex health technologies.

Coercion in mental health: a trial of the effectiveness of community treatment orders and an investigation of informal coercion in community mental health care

Background

Coercion comprisesformal coercionorcompulsion[treatment under a section of the Mental Health Act (MHA)] andinformal coercion(a range of treatment pressures, includingleverage). Community compulsion was introduced in England and Wales as community treatment orders (CTOs) in 2008, despite equivocal evidence of effectiveness. Little is known about the nature and operation of informal coercion.

Design

The programme comprised three studies, with associated substudies: Oxford Community Treatment Order Evaluation Trial (OCTET) – a study of CTOs comprising a randomised controlled trial comparing treatment on CTO to voluntary treatment via Section 17 Leave (leave of absence during treatment under section of the MHA), with 12-month follow-up, an economic evaluation, a qualitative study, an ethical analysis, the development of a new measure of capabilities and a detailed legal analysis of the trial design; OCTET Follow-up Study – a follow-up at 36 months; and Use of Leverage Tools to Improve Adherence in community Mental Health care (ULTIMA) – a study of informal coercion comprising a quantitative cross-sectional study of leverage, a qualitative study of patient and professional perceptions, and an ethical analysis.

Participants

Participants in the OCTET Study were 336 patients with psychosis diagnoses, currently admitted involuntarily and considered for ongoing community treatment under supervision. Participants in the ULTIMA Study were 417 patients from Assertive Outreach Teams, Community Mental Health Teams and substance misuse services.

Outcomes

The OCTET Trial primary outcome was psychiatric readmission. Other outcomes included measures of hospitalisation, a range of clinical and social measures, and a newly developed measure of capabilities – the Oxford Capabilities Questionnaire – Mental Health. For the follow-up study, the primary outcome was the level of disengagement during the 36 months.

Results

Community treatment order use did not reduce the rate of readmission [(59 (36%) of 166 patients in the CTO group vs. 60 (36%) of 167 patients in the non-CTO group; adjusted relative risk 1.0 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.33)] or any other outcome. There were no differences for any subgroups. There was no evidence that it might be cost-effective. Qualitative work suggested that CTOs’ (perceived) focus on medication adherence may influence how they are experienced. No general ethical justification was found for the use of a CTO regime. At 36-month follow-up, only 19 patients (6% of 329 patients) were no longer in regular contact with services. Longer duration of compulsion was associated with longer time to disengagement (p = 0.023) and fewer periods of discontinuity (p < 0.001). There was no difference in readmission outcomes over 36 months. Patients with longer CTO duration spent fewer nights in hospital. One-third (35%) of the ULTIMA sample reported lifetime experiences of leverage, lower than in the USA (51%), but patterns of leverage experience were similar. Reporting leverage made little difference to patients’ perceived coercion. Patients’ experiences of pressure were wide-ranging and pervasive, and perceived to come from family, friends and themselves, as well as professionals. Professionals were committed to patient-centred approaches, but felt obliged to assert authority when patients relapsed. We propose a five-step framework for determining the ethical status of offers by mental health professionals and give detailed guidance for professionals about how to exercise leverage.

Conclusions

Community Treatment Orders do not deliver clinical or social functioning benefits for patients. In the absence of further trials, moves should be made to restrict or stop their use. Informal coercion is widespread and takes different forms.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN73110773.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

The Capability Approach: A Critical Review of Its Application in Health Economics

The capability approach is an approach to assessing well-being developed by Amartya Sen. Interest in this approach has resulted in several attempts to develop questionnaires to measure and value capability at an individual level in health economics. This commentary critically reviews the ability of these questionnaires to measure and value capability. It is argued that the method used in the questionnaires to measure capability will result in a capability set that is an inaccurate description of the individual's true capability set. The measured capability set will either represent only one combination and ignore the value of choice in the capability set, or represent one combination that is not actually achievable by the individual. In addition, existing methods of valuing capability may be inadequate because they do not consider that capability is a set. It may be practically more feasible to measure and value capability approximately rather than directly. Suggestions are made on how to measure and value an approximation to capability, but further research is required to implement the suggestions.

Operationalising the capability approach for outcome measurement in mental health research

Amartya Sen's multidimensional capability approach focuses on the importance of freedoms to be or do things people have reason to value. It is an alternative to standard utilitarian welfarism, the theoretical approach to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost-utility analyses. Despite the limitations of the utility approach in capturing non-health benefits and broader welfare inequalities, there have been very limited applications of the capability approach in the mental health context where these issues are imperative. We report the development and application of a multidimensional instrument, the OxCAP-MH, which aims to operationalise the capability approach for outcome measurement in mental health research. The study was carried out as part of an ongoing programme on community coercion experienced by service users with severe and enduring mental illness being treated using Community Treatment Orders. Capabilities data were collected at baseline in the OCTET RCT for 333 'revolving door' mental health service users who were in involuntary hospital treatment at the time of recruitment in England (2008-2011). The research focused on the identification of capabilities domains most affected by mental illness and their association with socio-demographic and clinical factors and other measures of well-being such as the EQ-5D and Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scales. The OxCAP-MH item response rate was 90%-68%. There were significant correlations between service users' overall capability scores and the GAF, EQ-5D VAS and EQ-5D-3L utilities (corr = 0.249, 0.514, 0.415, respectively). The most affected capability domains were: 'Daily activities', 'Influencing local decisions', 'Enjoying recreation', 'Planning one's life' and 'Discrimination'. Age had a mixed effect, while female service users and those with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia or longer illness duration reported significantly lower capability scores. The results support the feasibility and validity of directly measuring human capabilities for the mentally ill and the potential for applying the approach to outcome measurement.

Outcome measurement in economic evaluations of public health interventions: a role for the capability approach?

Public health interventions have received increased attention from policy makers, and there has been a corresponding increase in the number of economic evaluations within the domain of public health. However, methods to evaluate public health interventions are less well established than those for medical interventions. Focusing on health as an outcome measure is likely to underestimate the impact of many public health interventions. This paper provides a review of outcome measures in public health; and describes the benefits of using the capability approach as a means to developing an all encompassing outcome measure.

Welfarism, extra-welfarism and capability: the spread of ideas in health economics

This paper explores the spread of ideas within health economics, in relation to the impact of the capability approach to date and the extent to which it might impact in the future. The paper uses UK decision making to illustrate this spread of ideas. Within health economics, Culyer used the capability approach in developing the extra-welfarist perspective (where health status directly influences which social state is preferred). It is not a direct application of capability as the evaluation's focus remains narrow; the concern is with functioning, and maximisation is retained. Culyer's work provided a theoretical basis for using quality-adjusted life-years in decision making and this perspective is accepted as the basis for evaluation by the UK National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). To the extent that extra-welfarism represents a capability approach, capabilities influence NICE's decision making and hence UK health care provision. This paper explores the extent to which extra-welfarism draws on the capability approach; the spread of extra-welfarist ideas; and recent interest in more direct applications of the capability approach.

Welfarism vs. extra-welfarism

'Extra-welfarism' has received some attention in health economics, yet there is little consensus on what distinguishes it from more conventional 'welfarist economics'. In this paper, we seek to identify the characteristics of each in order to make a systematic comparison of the ways in which they evaluate alternative social states. The focus, though this is not intended to be exclusive, is on health. Specifically, we highlight four areas in which the two schools differ: (i) the outcomes considered relevant in an evaluation; (ii) the sources of valuation of the relevant outcomes; (iii) the basis of weighting of relevant outcomes and (iv) interpersonal comparisons. We conclude that these differences are substantive.