QALYs for COVID-19: A Comparison of US EQ-5D-5L Value Sets

Lessons Learned from Model-based Economic Evaluations of COVID-19 Drug Treatments Under Pandemic Circumstances: Results from a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Following clinical research of potential coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatments, numerous decision-analytic models have been developed. Due to pandemic circumstances, clinical evidence was limited and modelling choices were made under great uncertainty. This study aimed to analyse key methodological characteristics of model-based economic evaluations of COVID-19 drug treatments, and specifically focused on modelling choices which pertain to disease severity levels during hospitalisation, model structure, sources of effectiveness and quality of life and long-term sequelae.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review and searched key databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus) for original articles on model-based full economic evaluations of COVID-19 drug treatments. Studies focussing on vaccines, diagnostic techniques and non-pharmaceutical interventions were excluded. The search was last rerun on 22 July 2023. Results were narratively synthesised in tabular form. Several aspects were categorised into rubrics to enable comparison across studies.

RESULTS

Of the 1047 records identified, 27 were included, and 23 studies (85.2%) differentiated patients by disease severity in the hospitalisation phase. Patients were differentiated by type of respiratory support, level of care management, a combination of both or symptoms. A Markov model was applied in 16 studies (59.3%), whether or not preceded by a decision tree or an epidemiological model. Most cost-utility analyses lacked the incorporation of COVID-19-specific health utility values. Of ten studies with a lifetime horizon, seven adjusted general population estimates to account for long-term sequelae (i.e. mortality, quality of life and costs), lasting for 1 year, 5 years, or a patient's lifetime. The most often reported parameter influencing the outcome of the analysis was related to treatment effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

The results illustrate the variety in modelling approaches of COVID-19 drug treatments and address the need for a more standardized approach in model-based economic evaluations of infectious diseases such as COVID-19.

TRIAL REGISTRY

Protocol registered in PROSPERO under CRD42023407646.

Health-related quality of life and associated factors among COVID-19 individuals managed with indian traditional medicine: A cross-sectional study from south India

Introduction

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) had a multidimensional impact on human life. It affects the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) which is a perceived measure of physical and mental health. We estimated the EuroQol utility value for COVID-19 and the associated factors for those managed at Siddha COVID care centres in Tamil Nadu.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted by a telephonic interview of 2000 randomly selected COVID-19 adults tested positive during June 2020 to Jan 2021. We collected sociodemographic, clinical and EQ-5D-5L profile. Mean EQ-5D-5L summary utility values and EQ-VAS scores were estimated. Multivariate regression was used to examine the factors associated with EQ-5D-5L. Study protocol was approved by the Institutional ethics committee of Government Siddha Medical College, Chennai (GSMC-CH-3401/ME-2/050/2021). The committee waived the written informed consent considering the pandemic situation of emerging infectious diseases.

Results

We interviewed 1047 participants. Of the total 68% were males with the median age (IQR) of 38 (29-51) years. The mean EQ-5D-5L utility score and EQ-VAS scores are 0.98 ± 0.05 and 92.14 ± 0.39 respectively. COVID-19 asymptomatic group reported a mean utility score of 0.99 ± 0.03 which is relatively more than the symptomatic group (0.97 ± 0.06),. EQ-VAS score was also reported high among the asymptomatic (95.45 ± 5.95) than the symptomatic (91.40 ± 8.69COVID-19.

Conclusion

The severity of illness and the comorbidity are significantly associated with a low HRQoL of COVID-19 patients.

Cost benefit analysis of alternative testing and quarantine policies for travelers for infection control: A case study of Singapore during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Border control mitigates local infections but bears a heavy economic cost, especially for tourism-reliant countries. While studies have supported the efficacy of border control in suppressing cross-border transmission, the trade-off between costs from imported and secondary cases and from lost economic activities has not been studied. This case study of Singapore during the COVID-19 pandemic aims to understand the impacts of varying quarantine length and testing strategies on the economy and health system. Additionally, we explored the impact of permitting unvaccinated travelers to address emerging equity concerns. We assumed that community transmission is stable and vaccination rates are high enough that inbound travelers are not dissuaded from traveling.

Methods

The number of travelers was predicted considering that longer quarantine reduces willingness to travel. A micro-simulation model predicted the number of COVID-19 cases among travelers, the resultant secondary cases, and the probability of being symptomatic in each group. The incremental net monetary benefit (INB) of Singapore was quantified under each border-opening policy compared to pre-opening status, based on tourism receipts, cost/profit from testing and quarantine, and cost and health loss due to COVID-19 cases.

Results

Compared to polymerase chain reaction (PCR), rapid antigen test (ART) detects fewer imported cases but results in fewer secondary cases. Longer quarantine results in fewer cases but lower INB due to reduced tourism receipts. Assuming the proportion of unvaccinated travelers is small (8% locally and 24% globally), allowing unvaccinated travelers will accrue higher INB without exceeding the intensive care unit (ICU) capacity. The highest monthly INB from all travelers is $2,236.24 m, with 46.69 ICU cases per month, achieved with ARTs at pre-departure and on arrival without quarantine. The optimal policy in terms of highest INB is robust under changes to various model assumptions. Among all cost-benefit components, the top driver for INB is tourism receipts.

Conclusions

With high vaccination rates locally and globally alongside stable community transmission, opening borders to travelers regardless of vaccination status will increase economic growth in the destination country. The caseloads remain manageable without exceeding ICU capacity, and costs of cases are offset by the economic value generated from travelers.

Health-Related Quality of Life Among Patients Recovered From COVID-19

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has impacted the lives and well-being of individuals worldwide, affecting both short-term and long-term quality of life. This study aimed to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and associated factors among patients who have recovered from COVID-19. A cross-sectional survey was conducted at 2 hospitals in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam between January and March 2022. Data were obtained from patients who recovered from COVID-19 using a structured questionnaire which included the EuroQoL-5 Dimension-5 Level (EQ-5D-5L) scale to quantify problems in 5 health dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) and the EuroQoL-Visual Analog Scale (EQ-VAS) to determine self-rated health status. Factors associated with HRQoL were determined using a generalized linear model (GLM). A total of 325 participants were included in the analysis. The overall mean score from the EQ-5D-5L and EQ-VAS was 0.86 (SD 0.21) and 78.6 (SD 19.9), respectively. Anxiety/Depression and Pain/Discomfort were the major problems experienced by the participants. Lower HRQoL scores were reported among those who were 60 years and older, female, had comorbidities, persistent symptoms, living alone and experiencing stress (all P < .05). This study showed that there was a significant reduction in HRQoL among individuals who recovered from COVID-19, compared with the general population. The findings suggest that more interventions need to be implemented to increase such individuals' quality of life, particularly for those who exhibit high-risk factors such as females, those with comorbidities, persistent symptoms, living alone and experiencing from stress.

Early Total Hip Arthroplasty is a Cost-Effective Treatment for Severe Radiographic Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis Over an Individual's Lifetime

BACKGROUND

Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) causes degenerative changes warranting total hip arthroplasty (THA) in approximately 50% of patients by age 60 years. For severe SCFE, a reorienting intertrochanteric osteotomy (ITO) following in situ pinning (ISP) can decrease impingement with hip flexion, but by altering proximal femoral geometry, complicates subsequent conversion THA. We hypothesized that increasing implant survivorship would affect the most cost-effective treatment strategy (ISP followed by ITO [ISP + ITO] with later THA versus ISP alone [ISPa] with earlier THA) over a patient's lifetime.

METHODS

A state-transition Markov model was constructed to analyze the cost-effectiveness of either ISPa or ISP + ITO over a 60-year time horizon for children who have severe, stable SCFE. Transition probabilities associated with implant and native hip survivorship, state utilities, and costs were derived from the literature. Sensitivity analyses assessed the model robustness. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were compared to a societal willingness to pay (WTP) of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

RESULTS

Over a 60-year horizon, ISPa was costlier ($291,836) than ISP + ITO ($75,227) but achieved overall better outcomes (51.4 QALYs ISPa versus 48.7 QALYs ISP + ITO), rendering ISPa cost-effective with an ICER of $80,980/QALY. Implant survivorship and time horizon were sensitive variables.

CONCLUSION

Based upon current implant performance, ISPa with subsequent earlier THA is cost-effective when considering an individual's life expectancy and thereby deserves consideration in patients who have severe SCFE. Without clear level 1 clinical data, our economic model considers a difficult problem, while providing families and clinicians with a framework for understanding treatment options.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic and decision analysis, Level III.

Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the EuroQol-5D-5L in previously hospitalized COVID-19 survivors with long COVID

The EuroQol 5-dimensions 5-levels (EQ-5D-5L) is a generic patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) used for evaluating health-related quality of life (HRQoL). No data on its psychometric properties in COVID-19 survivors is available. We aimed to describe internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity of the EQ-5D-5L in people with long-COVID. Ninety-three (n = 93) individuals previously hospitalized due to COVID-19 with post-COVID symptoms completed the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire twice one year after hospital discharge in a three-week interval. Internal consistency (Cronbach alpha and Omega value), test-retest reliability (kappa and ICC2,1) and construct validity (factor analysis), and floor/ceiling effects were calculated. No ceiling effect was observed in any dimension whereas the floor effect ranged from 53.76 to 94.62%. The overall Cronbach's α value was 0.75 (95%CI 0.64-0.83) and the Omega ω value was 0.77 (95%CI 0.66-0.84), showing good internal consistency of the questionnaire. Further, Cronbach's alpha values the of each dimension ranged from 0.63 to 0.77 whereas those for Omega values ranged from 0.70 to 0.79. The test-retest reliability of the total score was excellent (ICC2,1 0.86, 95%CI 0.798-0.911). The agreement percentage ranged from 85.13 to 96.77%; but kappa coefficients ranged from fair (κ: 0.37) to good (κ: 0.61). The factor analysis showed factor loadings from 0.585 to 0.813 supporting good construct validity. The EQ-5D-5L has good psychometric properties to be used as a PROM to assess HRQoL in hospitalized COVID-19 survivors with long-COVID.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Molnupiravir Versus Best Supportive Care for the Treatment of Outpatient COVID-19 in Adults in the US

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) imposes a substantial and ongoing burden on the US healthcare system and society. Molnupiravir is a new oral antiviral for treating COVID-19 in outpatient settings. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness profile of molnupiravir versus best supportive care in the treatment of adult patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at risk of progression to severe disease, from a US payer's perspective.

METHODS

The model was developed using a decision tree for the short-term acute phase of COVID-19 and a Markov state transition model for the long-term post-acute phase. This model compared molnupiravir with best supportive care as consistent with the MOVe-OUT trial. Costs were reported in 2021 US dollars. Transition probabilities were derived from the phase III MOVe-OUT trial and the TriNetX real-world electronic health records database. Costs were derived from the TriNetX database and utility values from a de novo, vignette-based utility study. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (DSA/PSA) were conducted. Primary outcomes included proportion hospitalized, proportion who died overall and by highest healthcare setting at the end of the acute phase, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental costs per QALY gained over a lifetime (100 years) horizon, discounted at 3% annually and assessed at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000 per QALY.

RESULTS

In this model, the use of molnupiravir led to an increase in QALYs (0.210) and decrease in direct total medical costs (-$895) per patient across a lifetime horizon, compared with best supportive care in COVID-19 outpatients. Molnupiravir was the dominant intervention when compared with best supportive care. Patients treated with molnupiravir were less likely to be hospitalized (6.38% vs. 9.20%) and more likely to remain alive (99.88% vs. 98.71%) during the acute phase. Through DSA, molnupiravir treatment effect of hospitalization reduction was identified to be the most influential parameter, and through PSA, molnupiravir remained dominant in 84% of the total simulations and, overall, 100% cost effective.

CONCLUSION

This analysis suggests that molnupiravir is cost effective compared with best supportive care for the treatment of adult outpatients with COVID-19. However, our study was limited by the unavailability of the most recent information on the rapidly evolving pandemic, including new viral variants, patient populations affected, and changes in standards of care. Further research should explore the impact of vaccination on the cost effectiveness of molnupiravir and other therapies, based on real-world data, to account for these changes, including the impact of vaccination and immunity.

Long-Term Health-Related Quality of Life in Non-Hospitalized Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Cases With Confirmed Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection in England: Longitudinal Analysis and Cross-Sectional Comparison With Controls

BACKGROUND

We aimed to quantify the unknown losses in health-related quality of life of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases using quality-adjusted lifedays (QALDs) and the recommended EQ-5D instrument in England.

METHODS

Prospective cohort study of nonhospitalized, polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-positive (SARS-CoV-2-positive) cases aged 12-85 years and followed up for 6 months from 1 December 2020, with cross-sectional comparison to SARS-CoV-2-negative controls. Main outcomes were QALD losses; physical symptoms; and COVID-19-related private expenditures. We analyzed results using multivariable regressions with post hoc weighting by age and sex, and conditional logistic regressions for the association of each symptom and EQ-5D limitation on cases and controls.

RESULTS

Of 548 cases (mean age 41.1 years; 61.5% female), 16.8% reported physical symptoms at month 6 (most frequently extreme tiredness, headache, loss of taste and/or smell, and shortness of breath). Cases reported more limitations with doing usual activities than controls. Almost half of cases spent a mean of £18.1 on nonprescription drugs (median: £10.0), and 52.7% missed work or school for a mean of 12 days (median: 10). On average, all cases lost 13.7 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.7, 17.7) QALDs, whereas those reporting symptoms at month 6 lost 32.9 (95% CI: 24.5, 37.6) QALDs. Losses also increased with older age. Cumulatively, the health loss from morbidity contributes at least 18% of the total COVID-19-related disease burden in the England.

CONCLUSIONS

One in 6 cases report ongoing symptoms at 6 months, and 10% report prolonged loss of function compared to pre-COVID-19 baselines. A marked health burden was observed among older COVID-19 cases and those with persistent physical symptoms.

Health-related quality of life among COVID-19 individuals: A cross-sectional study in Tamil Nadu, India

Introduction

The EQ-5D-5L questionnaire is a tool that is a very generic and preference-based instrument to describe the health-related quality of life. We have generated the stratified index utility value for the Tamil Nadu population and compared the utility values based on socio-demographic and clinical characteristics.

Methods

We conducted a community-based analytical cross-sectional study using telephonic interviews from November 2020 till December 2020 among individuals aged 18 years and above who were infected by the coronavirus confirmed with an RT-PCR within 30 days in Tamil Nadu State. EQ-5D-5L profile, socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of the study participants were collected and analysed.

Results

We interviewed 372 participants, with 57.5% were males, and their mean age was 44.5 ± 15.3 years. About 40% of participants reported as having comorbidities, such as diabetes (19.4%), hypertension (12.4%), heart disease (2.4%), kidney disease (0.8%) and others. The mean EQ-5D utility score was 0.925 ± 0.150, and the mean EQ-VAS was 90.68 ± 11.81. Overall, men had a higher utility value (0.938 ± 0.130) than women, (0.907 ± 0.170). Individuals with comorbidities, requiring longer hospitalisation were having lower utility scores than their counterparts.

Conclusion

We report the EQ-5D-5L utility values for the COVID-19 illness. These values would help to estimate quality-adjusted life years in health economic evaluation studies.

A Guide to Observable Differences in Stated Preference Evidence

Background and Objective

In health preference research, studies commonly hypothesize differences in parameters (i.e., differential or joint effects on attribute importance) and/or in choice predictions (marginal effects) by observable factors. Discrete choice experiments may be designed and conducted to test and estimate these observable differences. This guide covers how to explore and corroborate various observable differences in health preference evidence.

Methods

The analytical process has three steps: analyze the exploratory data, analyze the confirmatory data, and interpret and disseminate the evidence. In this guide, we demonstrate the process using dual samples (where exploratory and confirmatory samples were collected from different sources) on 2020 US COVID-19 vaccination preferences; however, investigators may apply the same approach using split samples (i.e., single source).

Results

The confirmatory analysis failed to reject ten of the 17 null hypotheses generated by the exploratory analysis (p < 0.05). Apart from demographic, socioeconomic, and geographic differences, political independents and persons who have never been vaccinated against influenza are among those least likely to be vaccinated (0.838 and 0.872, respectively).

Conclusions

For all researchers in health preference research, it is essential to know how to identify and corroborate observable differences. Once mastered, this skill may lead to more complex analyses of latent differences (e.g., latent classes, random parameters). This guide concludes with six questions that researchers may ask themselves when conducting such analyses or reviewing published findings of observable differences.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40271-021-00551-x.

Health-related quality of life and mental well-being of healthy and diseased persons in 8 countries: Does stringency of government response against early COVID-19 matter?

Objectives

Our study aimed to (1) assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and mental well-being of healthy and diseased persons in the general population during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic and (2) examine the relationship between HRQoL and mental well-being and individual characteristics and government response against COVID-19, as measured by the stringency index.

Methods

A web-based survey was administered to a cohort of persons from the general population of eight countries: Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Russia, South Africa, Sweden, the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States of America (US) from April 22 to May 5 and May 26 to June 1, 2020. Country-level stringency indices were adopted from the COVID-19 Government Response Tracker. Primary outcomes were HRQoL, measured using the EQ-5D-5L, and mental well-being, measured using the World Health Organization-5 Well-Being (WHO-5).

Findings

21,354 respondents were included in the study. Diseased respondents had lower EQ-5D-5L and WHO-5 scores compared to healthy respondents. Younger respondents had lower WHO-5 scores than older respondents. The stringency index had a stronger association with the EQ-5D-5L and WHO-5 among diseased respondents compared to healthy respondents. Increasing stringency was associated with an increase in EQ-5D-5L scores but a decrease in the WHO-5 index.

Conclusion

The stringency of government response is inversely related to HRQoL and mental well-being with a small positive relation with HRQoL and strong negative relation with mental well-being. The magnitude of effects differed for healthy and diseased persons and by age but was most favourable for diseased and older persons.

•

Persons with chronic conditions scored lower on EQ-5D-5L and WHO-5 domains, resulting in worse HRQoL and mental well-being.

•

An age gradient was found where younger persons had worse mental well-being than older persons.

•

Stringency of government response had opposite patterns for HRQoL and mental well-being.

•

The magnitude of effects of stringency differed for healthy and diseased persons but was most favourable for diseased persons.

•

Not feeling protected against COVID-19 had the one of the most negative association with mental well-being

A Net Benefit Approach for the Optimal Allocation of a COVID-19 Vaccine

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to implement a model-based approach to identify the optimal allocation of a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine in the province of Alberta, Canada.

METHODS

We developed an epidemiologic model to evaluate allocation strategies defined by age and risk target groups, coverage, effectiveness and cost of vaccine. The model simulated hypothetical immunisation scenarios within a dynamic context, capturing concurrent public health strategies and population behavioural changes.

RESULTS

In a scenario with 80% vaccine effectiveness, 40% population coverage and prioritisation of those over the age of 60 years at high risk of poor outcomes, active cases are reduced by 17% and net monetary benefit increased by $263 million dollars, relative to no vaccine. Concurrent implementation of policies such as school closure and senior contact reductions have similar impacts on incremental net monetary benefit ($352 vs $292 million, respectively) when there is no prioritisation given to any age or risk group. When older age groups are given priority, the relative benefit of school closures is much larger ($214 vs $118 million). Results demonstrate that the rank ordering of different prioritisation options varies by prioritisation criteria, vaccine effectiveness and coverage, and concurrently implemented policies.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results have three implications: (i) optimal vaccine allocation will depend on the public health policies in place at the time of allocation and the impact of those policies on population behaviour; (ii) outcomes of vaccine allocation policies can be greatly supported with interventions targeting contact reduction in critical sub-populations; and (iii) identification of the optimal strategy depends on which outcomes are prioritised.