Sheena Arora1, Stephen Goodall2, Rosalie Viney2, Stewart Einfeld3. 1. Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, PO Box 123, Broadway, NSW, 2007, Australia. sheena.arora@chere.uts.edu.au. 2. Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, PO Box 123, Broadway, NSW, 2007, Australia. 3. Brain and Mind Centre, University of Sydney, 94 Mallett Street, Camperdown, NSW, 2050, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This research produces a preference-based monetary valuation of informal care provided to children with intellectual disability (ID) that can be directly applied in economic evaluations. METHODS: A discrete-choice experiment (DCE) was designed to elicit an individual's willingness to accept compensation for different care tasks. Respondents were presented choice sets that included a care package comprising different amounts and types of care and asked to choose between the care package provided free of charge or providing that care themselves and receiving cash compensation. The care package included personal care, social support, household errands and housework, with the value of compensation, number of care hours provided and types of care varied across the choice sets. Choices were analysed using a generalised multinomial logit model and latent class model. RESULTS: A representative sample of 198 caregivers completed the survey (response rate 52%). Participants were recruited in Australia. Overall, caregivers would accept a minimum of Australian dollars ($A)20.61 to provide 1 h of care. The preferences for assistance varied significantly with different types of care tasks. Individuals placed the highest value on receiving assistance with social support ($A35.96) and the least value on receiving assistance with household errands ($A-0.92) CONCLUSIONS: This study produces a value of informal care provided to children with ID that can be directly applied in economic evaluations. The study shows that informal care tasks are not valued equally. Caregivers placed the most value on receiving assistance with social support, which may reflect the time spent by caregivers on these tasks.
OBJECTIVES: This research produces a preference-based monetary valuation of informal care provided to children with intellectual disability (ID) that can be directly applied in economic evaluations. METHODS: A discrete-choice experiment (DCE) was designed to elicit an individual's willingness to accept compensation for different care tasks. Respondents were presented choice sets that included a care package comprising different amounts and types of care and asked to choose between the care package provided free of charge or providing that care themselves and receiving cash compensation. The care package included personal care, social support, household errands and housework, with the value of compensation, number of care hours provided and types of care varied across the choice sets. Choices were analysed using a generalised multinomial logit model and latent class model. RESULTS: A representative sample of 198 caregivers completed the survey (response rate 52%). Participants were recruited in Australia. Overall, caregivers would accept a minimum of Australian dollars ($A)20.61 to provide 1 h of care. The preferences for assistance varied significantly with different types of care tasks. Individuals placed the highest value on receiving assistance with social support ($A35.96) and the least value on receiving assistance with household errands ($A-0.92) CONCLUSIONS: This study produces a value of informal care provided to children with ID that can be directly applied in economic evaluations. The study shows that informal care tasks are not valued equally. Caregivers placed the most value on receiving assistance with social support, which may reflect the time spent by caregivers on these tasks.
Authors: Christopher M Doran; Stewart L Einfeld; Rosamond H Madden; Michael Otim; Siân K Horstead; Louise A Ellis; Eric Emerson Journal: J Intellect Dev Disabil Date: 2012-03
Authors: Bernard van den Berg; Werner Brouwer; Job van Exel; Marc Koopmanschap; Geertrudis A M van den Bos; Frans Rutten Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2005-08-30 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Joanna Coast; Terry N Flynn; Chris Salisbury; Jordan Louviere; Tim J Peters Journal: Appl Health Econ Health Policy Date: 2006 Impact factor: 2.561
Authors: Isaac Aranda-Reneo; Luz María Peña-Longobardo; Juan Oliva-Moreno; Svenja Litzkendorf; Isabelle Durand-Zaleski; Eduardo F Tizzano; Julio López-Bastida Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-02 Impact factor: 3.390