초록/요약

Background The quality-of-life weights obtained in previous studies are frequently used in cost-utility analyses. The purpose of this study is to describe how the values obtained in previous studies are incorporated into the industry submissions requesting listing at the Korean National Health Insurance (NHI), focusing on the issues discussed in theoretical studies and national guidelines. Methods The industry submissions requesting listing at the Korean NHI from January 2007 until December 2009 were evaluated by two independent researchers at the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA). Specifically, we observed the methods that were used to pool, predict joint health state utilities, and retain consistency within submissions in terms of the issues discussed in methodological research papers and recommendations from national guidelines. Results More than half of the submissions used QALY as an outcome measure, and most of these submissions were sourced from prior studies. Heterogeneous methodologies were frequently used within a submission, with the inconsistent use of upper and lower anchors being prevalent. Assumptions behind measuring joint health state utilities or pooling multiple values for single health states were omitted in all submissions. Most national guidelines were rather vague regarding how to predict joint health states, how to select the best available value, how to maintain consistency within a submission, and how to generalize values obtained from prior studies. Conclusions Previously-generated values were commonly sourced, but this practice was frequently related to inconsistencies within and among submissions. Attention should be paid to the consistency and transparency of the value, especially if the value is sourced from prior studies.