Process / pipelineHealth EconomicsHealth economics / cost-utility analysisPipeline

Quality-Adjusted Life Years

Also known as: QALY Computation, Quality-Adjusted Survival, Utility-Weighted Life Years, QALY Calculation for Cost-Utility Analysis

OriginatorGeorge W. Torrance; Milton C. WeinsteinYear1986Sources2Related methods4

The quality-adjusted life year, or QALY, is the standard outcome measure of cost-utility analysis in health economics. It combines length and quality of life into one number by weighting each year a person lives by a utility value reflecting their health-related quality of life during that year, on a scale where one is full health and zero is death. One year in perfect health is one QALY; two years lived at a utility of one half is also one QALY. Because the metric expresses survival and health-related quality of life in a single unit, it lets analysts compare interventions that extend life, improve quality of life, or do both, and it forms the denominator of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios that health-technology agencies use to decide what to fund. George Torrance set out the methods for measuring the health-state utilities at the heart of the QALY, and Weinstein, Torrance, and McGuire later distilled the concept and its construction for a broad audience.

Key highlights

  • Combines length and quality of life in a single, interpretable unit, enabling comparison across diverse interventions.
  • Grounded in preference-based utility measurement, so the quality weights reflect how people value health states.
  • Provides the standard outcome for cost-utility analysis and the denominator of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios used in funding decisions.
  • Flexible enough to represent both discrete health-state sequences and continuous utility-time profiles via area under the curve.

Intuition

This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro

How it works

This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro

When to use it

Use QALYs when evaluating health interventions whose benefits include both changes in survival and changes in health-related quality of life, and when you need a common outcome to compare across very different treatments and disease areas, the typical situation in cost-utility analysis for health-technology assessment. They are appropriate when credible preference-based utility values for the relevant health states can be obtained, whether from direct elicitation, multi-attribute instruments, or published catalogues, and when the analysis is framed around individual patient outcomes over time. QALYs are less suitable when the relevant benefit is purely non-health, when no defensible utility values are available, or when the ethical premises of utility weighting, such as valuing a life year less when lived in poorer health, are unacceptable to stakeholders. For population burden-of-disease accounting rather than intervention appraisal, the disability-adjusted life year is the companion metric, and the two should not be conflated.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Combines length and quality of life in a single, interpretable unit, enabling comparison across diverse interventions.
  • Grounded in preference-based utility measurement, so the quality weights reflect how people value health states.
  • Provides the standard outcome for cost-utility analysis and the denominator of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios used in funding decisions.
  • Flexible enough to represent both discrete health-state sequences and continuous utility-time profiles via area under the curve.
Limitations
  • Utility values depend on the elicitation method and the population valuing the states, so different techniques can yield different QALYs.
  • Standard QALYs weight everyone's quality-adjusted life year equally, which can disadvantage people who cannot reach full health.
  • Assumes utilities are independent of how much time is spent in a state and additive over time, assumptions that may not hold.
  • Capturing all relevant dimensions of health in a single utility index inevitably simplifies complex patient experiences.

Common pitfalls

This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro

Applications

This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro

Frequently asked

How is a QALY actually calculated?

You multiply the time spent in each health state by that state's utility value, on a scale where one is full health and zero is death, and add the products. A year in full health is one QALY; two years at a utility of 0.5 is also one QALY. When health varies continuously, the QALY is the area under the utility-time profile, the integral of utility over time. For economic evaluation, future QALYs are discounted to present value. The benefit of an intervention is the difference in QALYs between the treated and untreated paths, as Weinstein, Torrance, and McGuire describe.

Where do the utility values come from?

From preference-based measurement of how people value health states. The two classic direct methods are the standard gamble, which finds the probability of full health (versus death) that makes a person indifferent to living in the impaired state, and the time trade-off, which asks how many years of full health are equivalent to a longer time in the impaired state. Utilities can also come from multi-attribute instruments such as the EQ-5D or Health Utilities Index, whose scoring is calibrated to population preferences. Torrance's review lays out and compares these techniques.

How does a QALY differ from a DALY?

Both combine length and quality of life in time units, but they are built and used differently. The QALY is a measure of health gained, anchored at one for full health and zero for death, derived from individual preference-based utilities, and used in cost-utility analysis to evaluate interventions. The DALY is a measure of health lost, anchored at zero for full health and one for a state equivalent to death via disability weights, and used to quantify population burden of disease. Roughly, QALYs are something to maximize and DALYs something to minimize, so they should never be treated as interchangeable.

Sources

  1. 1.
    Weinstein, M. C., Torrance, G., & McGuire, A. (2009). QALYs: The Basics. Value in Health, 12(Suppl 1), S5-S9.
  2. 2.
    Torrance, G. W. (1986). Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: A review. Journal of Health Economics, 5(1), 1-30.

You have read it. What now?

Cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 23). Quality-Adjusted Life Years. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/health-economics/quality-adjusted-life-years