Measuring Carer Outcomes in an Economic Evaluation: A Content Comparison of the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers,Carer Experience Scale,and Care-Related Quality of Life Using Exploratory Factor Analysis
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online October, 2020
Measuring Carer Outcomes in an Economic Evaluation: A Content Comparison of the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers,Carer Experience Scale,and Care-Related Quality of Life Using Exploratory Factor Analysis
Background. To incorporate the spillover effects experienced by carers providing informal care in health policy decisions, new carer-related preference-based measures have been developed for use in economic evaluation, which include the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers (ASCOT-Carer), Carer Experience Scale (CES), and Care-Related Quality of Life (CarerQoL). The aim of this study was to investigate the extent to which these 3 instruments measure complementary or overlapping constructs. Methods. Data were derived from an online survey undertaken with carers residing in Australia. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted to ascertain the underlying latent constructs of the 3 measures. Results. Data from 351 informal carers yielded a 5-factor model describing general quality of life outside caring, problems due to caring, fulfilment from caring, social support with caring, and relationship with the care recipient. Most of the ASCOT-Carer and the CarerQol items loaded onto the first and second factors, respectively. The greatest overlap was observed between CarerQol and CES items loading onto the other 3 shared common factors. Limitations. Online data collection resulted in inconsistent responses, which had to be removed to yield logical data. A convenience sampling approach may have compromised the generalizability of study findings. Conclusion. Although some overlap was observed, the 3 carer-related preference-based measures seem to tap into different constructs of carer-related quality of life and caring experiences and cannot be used interchangeably.
SandersGDNeumannPJBasuA, et al. Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses: second panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA. 2016;316(10):1093–103.
KrolMPapenburgJvan ExelJ.Does including informal care in economic evaluations matter? A systematic review of inclusion and impact of informal care in cost-effectiveness studies. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015;33(2):123–35.
4.
GoodrichKKaambwaBAl-JanabiH.The inclusion of informal care in applied economic evaluation: a review. Value Health. 2012;15(6):975–981.
5.
Al-JanabiHNichollsJOyebodeJ.The need to “carer proof” healthcare decisions. BMJ. 2016;352:i1651.
6.
DixonSWalkerMSalekS.Incorporating carer effects into economic evaluation. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24(1):43–53.
7.
Al-JanabiHMcLoughlinCOyebodeJEfstathiouNCalvertM.Six mechanisms behind carer wellbeing effects: a qualitative study of healthcare delivery. Soc Sci Med. 2019;235:112382.
8.
WittenbergEJamesLPProsserLA.Spillover effects on caregivers’ and family members’ utility: a systematic review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37(4):475–99.
9.
BrouwerWvan ExelNvan GorpBRedekopW.The CarerQol instrument: a new instrument to measure care-related quality of life of informal caregivers for use in economic evaluations. Qual Life Res. 2006;15(6):1005–21.
10.
Al-JanabiHFlynnTNCoastJ.Estimation of a preference-based carer experience scale. Med Decis Making. 2011;31(3):458–68.
11.
RandSEMalleyJNNettenAPForderJE.Factor structure and construct validity of the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers (ASCOT-Carer). Qual Life Res. 2015;24(11):2601–14.
12.
DeekenJFTaylorKLManganPYabroffKRInghamJM.Care for the caregivers: a review of self-report instruments developed to measure the burden, needs, and quality of life of informal caregivers. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2003;26(4):922–53.
13.
Al-JanabiHCoastJFlynnTN.What do people value when they provide unpaid care for an older person? A meta-ethnography with interview follow-up. Soc Sci Med. 2008;67(1):111–21.
14.
HoefmanRAl-JanabiHMcCaffreyNCurrowDRatcliffeJ.Measuring caregiver outcomes in palliative care: a construct validation study of two instruments for use in economic evaluations. Qual Life Res. 2015;24(5):1255–73.
15.
ForderJMalleyJRandSVadeanFJonesKNettenA.Identifying the impact of adult social care: Interpreting outcome data for use in the Adult Social Care Outcomes Framework. 2015. Available from:https://www.pssru.ac.uk/pub/5158.pdf. Accessed February 6, 2020.
16.
NettenABurgePMalleyJ, et al. Outcomes of social care for adults: developing a preference-weighted measure. Health Technol Assess. 2012;16(16):1–166.
17.
RandSMalleyJVadeanFForderJ.Measuring the outcomes of long-term care for unpaid carers: Comparing the ASCOT-Carer, Carer Experience Scale and EQ-5D-3L. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2019;17(1):184.
18.
HoefmanRJvan ExelJRoseJMvan de WeteringEJBrouwerWB.A discrete choice experiment to obtain a tariff for valuing informal care situations measured with the CarerQol instrument. Med Decis Making. 2014;34(1):84–96.
19.
HerdmanMGudexCLloydA, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–36.
20.
RichardsonJIezziAKhanMMaxwellA.Validity and reliability of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL)-8D multi-attribute utility instrument. Patient. 2014;7(1):85–96.
21.
HughesMEWaiteLJHawkleyLCCacioppoJT.A short scale for measuring loneliness in large surveys: results from two population-based studies. Res Aging. 2004;26(6):655–72.
22.
GivenCWGivenBStommelMCollinsCKingSFranklinS.The caregiver reaction assessment (CRA) for caregivers to persons with chronic physical and mental impairments. Res Nurs Health. 1992;15(4):271–83.
23.
HoefmanRJvan ExelJBrouwerWBF. Measuring care-related quality of life of caregivers for use in economic evaluations: CarerQol tariffs for Australia, Germany, Sweden, UK, and US. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017;35(4):469–78.
24.
BatchelderLMalleyJBurgeP, et al. Carer social care-related quality of life outcomes: estimating English preference weights for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers. Value Health. 2019;22(12):1427–40.
25.
StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software. Release 15. College Station (TX): StataCorp LLC; 2017.
26.
CohenJ.Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed.Hillsdale (NJ): Erlbaum; 1988.
FabrigarLWegenerD.Understanding Statistics: Exploratory Factor Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012.
29.
HuLTBentlerPM.Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling. 1999;6(1):1–55.
30.
FabrigarLRWegenerDTMacCallumRCStrahanEJ.Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychol Methods. 1999;4(3):272–99.
31.
RandSMalleyJForderJ.Are reasons for care-giving related to carers’ care-related quality of life and strain? Evidence from a survey of carers in England. Health Soc Care Community. 2019;27(1):151–60.
32.
RandSVadeanFForderJ.The impact of social care services on carers’ quality of life. Int J Care Caring. 2020;4(2):235–59.
33.
Al-JanabiHFlynnTNCoastJ.Development of a self-report measure of capability wellbeing for adults: the ICECAP-A. Qual Life Res. 2012;21(1):167–76.
34.
HackertMQNExelJVBrouwerWBF. Valid outcome measures in care for older people: comparing the ASCOT and the ICECAP-O. Value Health. 2017;20(7):936–44.
35.
Perry-DuxburyMvan ExelJBrouwerW, et al. A validation study of the ICECAP-O in informal carers of people with dementia from eight European Countries. Qual Life Res. 2019;29(1):237–25.
36.
BrazierJRatcliffeJSalomonJATsuchiyaA.Measuring and Valuing Health Benefits for Economic Evaluation. 2nd ed.Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press; 2017.
37.
DixonPRoundJ.Caring for carers: positive and normative challenges for future research on carer spillover effects in economic evaluation. Value Health. 2019;22(5):549–54.
38.
TilfordJMPayakachatN.Progress in measuring family spillover effects for economic evaluations. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2015;15(2):195–8.
39.
Al-JanabiHvan ExelJBrouwerWCoastJ.A framework for including family health spillovers in economic evaluation. Med Decis Making. 2016;36(2):176–86.
40.
KoopmanschapMAvan ExelJNvan den BergBBrouwerWB.An overview of methods and applications to value informal care in economic evaluations of healthcare. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(4):269–80.
