Search

Purpose: Traditionally, researchers have relied on eliciting preferences through face-to-face interviews. Recently, there has been a shift towards using internet-based methods. Different methods of data collection may be a source of variation in the results. In this study, we compare the preferences for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) service user measure elicited using best-worst scaling (BWS) via a face-to-face interview and an online survey.Methods: Data were collected from a representative sample of the general population in England. The respondents (face-to-face: n = 500; online: n = 1001) completed a survey, which included the BWS experiment involving the ASCOT measure. Each respondent received eight best-worst scenarios and made four choices (best, second best, worst, second worst) in each scenario. Multinomial logit regressions were undertaken to analyse the data taking into account differences in the characteristics of the two samples and the repeated nature of the data.Results: We initially found a number of small significant differences in preferences between the two methods across all ASCOT domains. These differences were substantially reduced-from 15 to 5 out of 30 coefficients being different at the 5% level-and remained small in value after controlling for differences in observable and unobservable characteristics of the two samples.Conclusions: This comparison demonstrates that face-to-face and internet surveys may lead to fairly similar preferences for social care-related quality of life when differences in sample characteristics are controlled for. With or without a constant sampling frame, studies should carefully design the BWS exercise and provide similar levels of clarification to participants in each survey to minimise the amount of error variance in the choice process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The provision and funding of long-term care (LTC) for older people varies between European countries. Despite differences, there is limited information about the comparative performance of LTC systems in Europe. In this study, we compared quality of life (QoL) of informal carers of home care service users in Austria, England and Finland.Informal carers were surveyed in Austria, England and Finland. The study data (n = 835) contained information on social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) associated with the ASCOT-Carer measure, and characteristics of carers and care recipients from each country. We applied risk-adjustment methods using a fractional regression model to produce risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores for the comparative analysis. In a sensitivity analysis, we applied multiple imputation to missing data to validate our findings.We found that the mean values of the risk-adjusted SCRQoL of informal carers in England were 1.4–2.9% and 0.3–0.5% higher than in Finland and Austria, and the mean values of the risk-adjusted SCRQoL of carers in Austria were 0.8–2.7% higher than in Finland. Differences in the mean values of the country-specific risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores were small and statistically non-significant. English informal carers were less healthy and co-resided with care resipients more often than carers in Austria or Finland.Small differences between the risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores between Austria, England and Finland are consistent with the observation that the countries provide different types of support for informal carers. Our results help local and national decision-makers in these countries to benchmark their informal care support systems.Methods: The provision and funding of long-term care (LTC) for older people varies between European countries. Despite differences, there is limited information about the comparative performance of LTC systems in Europe. In this study, we compared quality of life (QoL) of informal carers of home care service users in Austria, England and Finland.Informal carers were surveyed in Austria, England and Finland. The study data (n = 835) contained information on social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) associated with the ASCOT-Carer measure, and characteristics of carers and care recipients from each country. We applied risk-adjustment methods using a fractional regression model to produce risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores for the comparative analysis. In a sensitivity analysis, we applied multiple imputation to missing data to validate our findings.We found that the mean values of the risk-adjusted SCRQoL of informal carers in England were 1.4–2.9% and 0.3–0.5% higher than in Finland and Austria, and the mean values of the risk-adjusted SCRQoL of carers in Austria were 0.8–2.7% higher than in Finland. Differences in the mean values of the country-specific risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores were small and statistically non-significant. English informal carers were less healthy and co-resided with care resipients more often than carers in Austria or Finland.Small differences between the risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores between Austria, England and Finland are consistent with the observation that the countries provide different types of support for informal carers. Our results help local and national decision-makers in these countries to benchmark their informal care support systems.Results: The provision and funding of long-term care (LTC) for older people varies between European countries. Despite differences, there is limited information about the comparative performance of LTC systems in Europe. In this study, we compared quality of life (QoL) of informal carers of home care service users in Austria, England and Finland.Informal carers were surveyed in Austria, England and Finland. The study data (n = 835) contained information on social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) associated with the ASCOT-Carer measure, and characteristics of carers and care recipients from each country. We applied risk-adjustment methods using a fractional regression model to produce risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores for the comparative analysis. In a sensitivity analysis, we applied multiple imputation to missing data to validate our findings.We found that the mean values of the risk-adjusted SCRQoL of informal carers in England were 1.4–2.9% and 0.3–0.5% higher than in Finland and Austria, and the mean values of the risk-adjusted SCRQoL of carers in Austria were 0.8–2.7% higher than in Finland. Differences in the mean values of the country-specific risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores were small and statistically non-significant. English informal carers were less healthy and co-resided with care resipients more often than carers in Austria or Finland.Small differences between the risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores between Austria, England and Finland are consistent with the observation that the countries provide different types of support for informal carers. Our results help local and national decision-makers in these countries to benchmark their informal care support systems.Conclusion: The provision and funding of long-term care (LTC) for older people varies between European countries. Despite differences, there is limited information about the comparative performance of LTC systems in Europe. In this study, we compared quality of life (QoL) of informal carers of home care service users in Austria, England and Finland.Informal carers were surveyed in Austria, England and Finland. The study data (n = 835) contained information on social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) associated with the ASCOT-Carer measure, and characteristics of carers and care recipients from each country. We applied risk-adjustment methods using a fractional regression model to produce risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores for the comparative analysis. In a sensitivity analysis, we applied multiple imputation to missing data to validate our findings.We found that the mean values of the risk-adjusted SCRQoL of informal carers in England were 1.4–2.9% and 0.3–0.5% higher than in Finland and Austria, and the mean values of the risk-adjusted SCRQoL of carers in Austria were 0.8–2.7% higher than in Finland. Differences in the mean values of the country-specific risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores were small and statistically non-significant. English informal carers were less healthy and co-resided with care resipients more often than carers in Austria or Finland.Small differences between the risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores between Austria, England and Finland are consistent with the observation that the countries provide different types of support for informal carers. Our results help local and national decision-makers in these countries to benchmark their informal care support systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: In developed countries, progressive rapid aging is increasing the need for social care. This study aimed to determine Japanese utility weights for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) four-level self-completion questionnaire (SCT4).Methods: We recruited 1050 Japanese respondents from the general population, stratified by sex and age, from five major cities. In the best-worst scaling (BWS) phase, respondents ranked various social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) states as "best," "worst," "second-best," or "second-worst," as per the ASCOT. Then, respondents were asked to evaluate eight different SCRQOL states by composite time-trade off (cTTO). A mixed logit model was used to analyze BWS data. The association between cTTO and latent BWS scores was used to estimate a scoring formula that would convert BWS scores to SC-QALY (social care quality-adjusted life year) scores.Results: Japanese BWS weightings for ASCOT-SCT4 were successfully estimated and found generally consistent with the UK utility weights. However, coefficients on level 3 of "Control over daily life" and "Occupation" domains differed markedly between Japan and the UK. The worst Japanese SCRQoL state was lower than that for the UK, as Japanese cTTO results showed more negative valuations. In general, Japanese SC-QALY score (for more than 90% of health states) was lower than that for the UK.Conclusions: We successfully obtained Japanese utility weights for ASCOT SCT4. This will contribute to the measurement and understanding of social care outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is increasing interest in assessing the effects of interventions on older people, people with long-term conditions and their informal carers for use in economic evaluation. The Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers (ASCOT-Carer) is a measure that specifically assesses the impact of social care services on informal carers. To date, the ASCOT-Carer has not been preference-weighted.Objectives: To estimate preference-based index values for the English version of the ASCOT-Carer from the general population in England.Methods: The ASCOT-Carer consists of 7 domains, each reflecting aspects of social care-related quality of life in informal carers. Preferences for the ASCOT-Carer social care-related quality of life states were estimated using a best-worst scaling exercise in an online survey. The survey was administered to a sample of the general adult population in England (n = 1000). Participants were asked to put themselves into the hypothetical state of being an informal carer and indicate which attribute they thought was the best (first and second) and worst (first and second) from a profile list of 7 attributes reflecting the 7 domains, each ranging at a different level (1-4). Multinomial logit regression was used to analyze the data and estimate preference weights for the ASCOT-Carer measure.Results: The most valued aspect by English participants was the 'occupation' attribute at its highest level. Results further showed participants rated having no control over their daily life as the lowest attribute-level of all those presented. The position of the 7 attributes influenced participants' best and worst choices, and there was evidence of both scale and taste heterogeneity on preferences.Conclusion: This study has established a set of preference-based index values for the ASCOT-Carer in England derived from the best-worst scaling exercise that can be used for economic evaluation of interventions on older individuals and their informal carers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]