Cost-effectiveness of powered mobility devices for elderly people with disability

References

• Blomquist U, Nicolaou I. Förskrivningsprocessen för hjälpmedel till personer med funktionshinder [The prescription process for assistive devices for people with disabilities]. Stockholm: Hjälpmedelsinstitutet (Swedish Institute of Assistive Technology); 2007
   Google Scholar
• Hjälpmedelsinstitutet (Swedish Institute of Assistive Technology). Äldrestatistik 2010: Äldres hälsa, funktionsnedsättning, boende och hjälpmedel [Older people's statistics 2010: older people's health, disability, housing and assistive diveces]. Stockholm: Hjälpmedelsoinstitutet (Swedish Institute of Assistive Technology); 2010
   Google Scholar
• Statistics Sweden. The future population of Sweden 2012–2060. Stockholm: Statistics Sweden; 2012
   Google Scholar
• Salminen AL, Brandt A, Samuelsson K, et al. Mobility devices to promote activity and participation: a systematic review. J Rehabil Med 2009;41:697–706
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greer N, Brasure M, Wilt TJ. Wheeled mobility (wheelchair) service delivery: scope of the evidence. Ann Intern Med 2012;156:141–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Statistics Sweden. Consumer price index for Sweden. 2014. Available from: www.scb.se/PR0101-EN [last accessed 13 Jan 2015]
   Google Scholar
• Statistics Sweden. Lönestrukturstatistik, landstingskommunal sektor (wage statistics, county councils). Stockholm: Statistics Sweden; 2012
   Google Scholar
• Drummond MF, Schulper MJ, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005
   Google Scholar
• Tan-Torres Edejer T, Baltussen R, Adam T, et al. WHO guide to cost-effectiveness analysis. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 2003
   Google Scholar
• Koopmanschap MA, van Exel JN, van den Berg B, Brouwer WB. An overview of methods and applications to value informal care in economic evaluations of healthcare. Pharmacoeconomics 2008;26:269–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WSP Analys & Strategi. Trafikanternas värdering av tid – den nationella tidsvärderingsstudien 2007/08 (Travelers valuation of time – the national time valuation study 2007/08). Stockholm: WSP Sverige AB; 2010
   Google Scholar
• Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med 2001;33:337–43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 1997;35:1095–108
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EuroQol Group. EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Pol 1990;16:199–208
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan M, Karlsson J, Ware Jr JE. The Swedish SF-36 Health Survey-I. Evaluation of data quality, scaling assumptions, reliability and construct validity across general populations in Sweden. Soc Sci Med 1995;41:1349–58
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ware JE, Jr Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30:473–83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braizer J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002;21:271–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kharroubi S, Braizer J, O'Hagan A. Modelling covariates for the SF-6D standard gamble health state preference data using nonparametric Bayesian method. Soc Sci Med 2007;64:1242–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wessels R, de Witte, Andrich R, et al. IPPA, a user centred approach to assess effectiveness of assistive technology provision. Technol Disabil 2000;13:105–15
   Google Scholar
• Wessels R, Persson J, Lorentsen O, et al. IPPA: Individually Prioritised Problem Assessment. Technol Disabil 2002;14:141–5
   Google Scholar
• WHO. WHO disability assessment schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2). 2011. Available from: http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/whodasii/en/index.html [last accessed 17 March 2011]
   Google Scholar
• Woolley SB, Cardoni AA, Goethe JW. Last-observation-carried-forward imputation method in clinical efficacy trials: review of 352 antidepressant studies. Pharmacotherapy 2009;29:1408–16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiroiwa T, Sung YK, Fukuda T, et al. International survey on willingness-to-pay (WTP) for one additional QALY gained: what is the threshold of cost effectiveness? Health Econ 2010;19:422–37
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuelsson K, Wressle E. Powered wheelchair and scooters for outdoor mobility: a pilot study on costs and benefits. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2014;9:330–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Persson J, Husberg M. Can we rely on QALYs for assistive technologies? Technol Disabil 2012;24:93–100
   Google Scholar
• Horsman J, Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance G. The Health Utility index (HUI): concepts, measuremnt properties and applications. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003;1:54
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marra CA, Marion SA, Guh DP, et al. Not all “quality-adjusted life years” are equal. J Clin Epidemiol 2007;60:616–24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jara-Diaz SR, Munizaga MA, Greeven P, et al. Estimating the value of leisure from a time assignment model. Zurich, Switzerland; 2007
   Google Scholar
• Cohen DR, Henderson JB. Health, prevention and economics. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications; 1992
   Google Scholar
• Posnett J, Jan S. Indirect cost in economic evaluation: the opportunity cost of unpaid inputs. Health Econ 1996;5:13–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fredriksson C, et al. The value of a powered wheelchair – spouses' perspective. Vilamoura, Portugal: Association for the Advancement of Assistive Technology in Europe; 2013
   Google Scholar