Economic valuation of informal care: An overview of methods and applications

被引:303
作者
Van Den Berg B. [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Brouwer W.B.F. [1 ,2 ]
Koopmanschap M.A. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Dept. of Hlth. Policy and Management, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam
[2] Inst. for Med. Technology Assessment, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam
[3] Dept. for Prev. and Hlth. Serv. Res., Natl. Inst. for Pub. Hlth./Environ.
[4] Dept. of Hlth. Policy and Management, Inst. for Med. Technology Assessment, Erasmus Medical Center Rotterdam, 3000 DR Rotterdam
来源
The European Journal of Health Economics, formerly: HEPAC | 2004年 / 5卷 / 1期
关键词
Economic evaluation; Informal care; Valuation methods;
D O I
10.1007/s10198-003-0189-y
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Informal care makes up a significant part of the total amount of care provided to care recipients with chronic and terminal diseases. Still, informal care is often neglected in economic evaluations of health care programs. Probably this is related to the fact that the costs of informal care are to an important extent related to time inputs by relatives and friends of care recipients and time is not easy to value. Development of theoretically sound, yet easily applicable valuation methods is therefore important since ignoring the costs of informal care may lead to undesirable shifts between formal and informal care. Moreover, there is increasing evidence that providing informal care may lead to health problems for the caregiver, both in terms of morbidity and mortality. Until now these health effects have not been incorporated in economic evaluations. More attention for the identification and valuation of the full costs and (health) effects of informal care for the informal caregiver, seems needed therefore. This contribution presents a critical evaluation of the available methods to incorporate informal care in economic evaluations.
引用
收藏
页码:36 / 45
页数:9
相关论文
共 51 条
  • [31] Lancaster K., Consumer Demand: A New Approach, (1971)
  • [32] Green P.E., Srinivasan V., Conjoint analysis in consumer research: Issues and outlook, J Consumer Res, 5, pp. 103-123, (1978)
  • [33] Ryan M., Farrar S., Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care, BMJ, 320, pp. 1530-1533, (2000)
  • [34] Ratcliffe J., The use of conjoint analysis to elicit willingness-to-pay values. Proceed with caution?, Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 16, pp. 270-275, (2000)
  • [35] De Groot A.W.M., Van Praag B.M.S., Velthuijsen J.W., Et al., Wie dan zorgt, Naar een Vrljwel Volledige Arbeidsparticipatie, pp. 143-217, (2000)
  • [36] Clipp E.C., Moore M.J., Caregiver time use: An outcome measure in clinical trial research on Alzheimer's disease, Clin Pharmacol Ther, 58, pp. 228-236, (1995)
  • [37] Davis K.L., Marin D.B., Kane R., Et al., The Caregiver Activity Survey (CAS): Development and validation of a new measure for caregivers of persons with Alzheimer's disease, Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 12, pp. 978-988, (1997)
  • [38] Kramer B.J., Gain in the caregiving experience: Where are we? What next?, Gerontologist, 37, pp. 218-232, (1997)
  • [39] Hughes S.L., Giobble-Hurder A., Weaver F.M., Et al., Relationship between caregiver burden and health-related quality of life, Gerontologist, 39, pp. 534-545, (1999)
  • [40] Low J.T., Payne S., Roderick P., The impact of stroke on informal carers: A literature review, Soc Sci Med, 49, pp. 711-725, (1999)