Where's WALY? : A proof of concept study of the 'wellbeing adjusted life year' using secondary analysis of cross-sectional survey data. Issue 1 (December 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Johnson, Rebecca; Jenkinson, David; Stinton, Chris; Taylor-Phillips, Sian; Madan, Jason; Stewart-Brown, Sarah; Clarke, Aileen
• Is Part Of: Health and quality of life outcomes. Volume 14:Issue 1(2016)
• Page Start: 1
• Page End: 9
• Publication Date: 2016-12
• Subjects: EQ-5D -- WALY -- Wellbeing -- WEMWBS; Outcome assessment (Medical care) -- Periodicals; Quality of life -- Periodicals; 362.1
• DOI: 10.1186/s12955-016-0532-5
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1477-7525

Abstract

Abstract Background The Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) is a measure that combines life extension and health improvement in a single score, reflecting preferences around different types of health gain. It can therefore be used to inform decision-making around allocation of health care resources to mutually exclusive options that would produce qualitatively different health benefits. A number of quality-of-life instruments can be used to calculate QALYs. The EQ-5D is one of the most commonly used, and is the preferred option for submissions to NICE (https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg9/ ). However, it has limitations that might make it unsuitable for use in areas such as public and mental health where interventions may aim to improve well-being. One alternative to the QALY is a Wellbeing-Adjusted Life Year. In this study we explore the need for a Wellbeing-Adjusted Life Year measure by examining the extent to which a measure of wellbeing (the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale) maps onto the EQ-5D-3L. Methods Secondary analyses were conducted on data from the Coventry Household Survey in which 7469 participants completed the EQ-5D-3L, Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale, and a measure of self-rated health. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, Pearson's and Spearman's correlations, linear regression, and receiver operating characteristic curves. Results Approximately 75 % of participants scored the maximum on the EQ-5D-3L. Those with maximum EQ-5D-3L scores reported a wide range of levels of mental wellbeing. Both the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale and the EQ-5D-3L were able to detect differences between those with higher and lower levels of self-reported health. Linear regression indicated that scores on the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale and the EQ-5D-3L were weakly, positively correlated (with R2 being 0.104 for the index and 0.141 for the visual analogue scale). Conclusion The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale maps onto the EQ-5D-3L to only a limited extent. Levels of mental wellbeing varied greatly amongst participants who had the maximum score on the EQ-5D-3L. To evaluate the relative effectiveness of interventions that impact on mental wellbeing, a new measure – a Wellbeing Adjusted Life Year – is needed.