Literature DB >> 17310339

Costs and quality of life of multiple sclerosis in Austria.

Gisela Kobelt1, Jenny Berg, Peter Lindgren, Carlotta Plesnilla, Ulf Baumhackl, Thomas Berger, Harald Kolleger, Karl Vass.   

Abstract

This cost-of-illness analysis is part of a Europe-wide study on the costs of multiple sclerosis (MS) and is based on information from patients in Austria. The objective was to estimate the costs and quality of life (QOL) related to the level of disease severity and progression. Questionnaires were sent to 2995 patients registered with a nationwide patient organization. Patients were asked to provide details regarding the type of disease, relapses, level of functional disability, resource consumption (medical and non-medical), work absence, sick leave and informal care, as well as QOL. Surveys from a total of 1.019 (34.0%) patients were used in the analysis, of which the mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 50 (12.2) years; 70% of patients were female. Patients with mild disease (Expanded Disability Status Scale [EDSS] score 0-3) represented 41% of patients, 36% had moderate disease (EDSS score 4-6.5) and 22% had severe disease (EDSS score > or =7). The mean (SD) EDSS score in the sample was 4.4 (2.4), with a mean (SD) utility of 0.55 (0.32). Costs are presented from the societal perspective as well as from the viewpoint of payers of care and invalidity. Mean total annual costs for an average patient in the sample were estimated at euro 40.300 in the societal perspective, whereas payers' costs were estimated at only half of this. Disease-modifying drugs represented a quarter of all costs in the payer perspective, but only 12% of societal costs. For society, the highest cost was the loss of productivity (36%), while payments for this loss (invalidity pensions and sick-leave compensation) accounted for only 21% of total costs to payers. Costs are highly correlated with disease progression, increasing four-fold from early disease to very severe disease (euro 16.000 to euro 63.800). Mean annual costs per patient reported are thus determined by the distribution of disease severity in the sample. Workforce participation decreases from roughly 75% in early disease to less than 10% in the late stages, despite the fact that 70% of patients with an EDSS score of 8 or 9 are still below the official retirement age. Consequently, productivity losses increase over fivefold. In parallel, costs of informal care increase from euro 325 per year at an EDSS score of 0-1 to over euro 20.000 at an EDSS score of 8-9. Hospitalization is very infrequent in early disease, representing less than euro 1.000 for patients with an EDSS score of 0-1, but increases steeply for patients with an EDSS score > or =5. QOL, measured as utility scores, decreases rapidly from almost 0.90 to 0.05 as disability becomes severe. However, the loss of utility is evident at all disease levels. Young patients with an EDSS score of approximately 2 have a utility that is 0.15 lower than matched individuals from the general population. This loss increases to approximately 0.4 for patients over 60 years of age with an average EDSS score of 6.0-6.5. Patients with a recent relapse had lower utility (-0.1) and higher costs (+ euro 4.750).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17310339     DOI: 10.1007/s10198-006-0382-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Health Econ        ISSN: 1618-7598


  10 in total

Review 1.  EQ-5D in Central and Eastern Europe: 2000-2015.

Authors:  Fanni Rencz; László Gulácsi; Michael Drummond; Dominik Golicki; Valentina Prevolnik Rupel; Judit Simon; Elly A Stolk; Valentin Brodszky; Petra Baji; Jakub Závada; Guenka Petrova; Alexandru Rotar; Márta Péntek
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2016-07-29       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Multiple sclerosis: relapses, resource use, and costs.

Authors:  A J Hawton; C Green
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2015-10-05

Review 3.  Pharmacoeconomic considerations in the treatment of multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Jessica Sharac; Paul McCrone; Ramon Sabes-Figuera
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2010-09-10       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 4.  Economic burden of multiple sclerosis: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Huseyin Naci; Rachael Fleurence; Julie Birt; Amy Duhig
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  EQ-5D studies in nervous system diseases in eight Central and East European countries: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Valentina Prevolnik Rupel; Marko Divjak; Zsombor Zrubka; Fanni Rencz; László Gulácsi; Dominik Golicki; Dagmara Mirowska-Guzel; Judit Simon; Valentin Brodszky; Petra Baji; Jakub Závada; Guenka Petrova; Alexandru Rotar; Márta Péntek
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2019-05-16

6.  Future MS care: a consensus statement of the MS in the 21st Century Steering Group.

Authors:  Peter Rieckmann; Alexey Boyko; Diego Centonze; Alasdair Coles; Irina Elovaara; Eva Havrdová; Otto Hommes; Jacques Lelorier; Sarah A Morrow; Celia Oreja-Guevara; Nick Rijke; Sven Schippling
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2012-08-31       Impact factor: 4.849

7.  Assessing cost-effectiveness in the management of multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Ceri J Phillips; Ioan Humphreys
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2009-11-18

Review 8.  Cost of Illness of Multiple Sclerosis - A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Olivia Ernstsson; Hanna Gyllensten; Kristina Alexanderson; Petter Tinghög; Emilie Friberg; Anders Norlund
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-07-13       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Spatial and temporal distribution of the prevalence of unemployment and early retirement in people with multiple sclerosis: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Bruno Kusznir Vitturi; Alborz Rahmani; Guglielmo Dini; Alfredo Montecucco; Nicoletta Debarbieri; Paolo Bandiera; Mario Alberto Battaglia; Tommaso Manacorda; Benedetta Persechino; Giuliana Buresti; Michela Ponzio; Matilde Inglese; Paolo Durando
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-28       Impact factor: 3.752

10.  Differences in utility scores obtained through Brazilian and UK value sets: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Maíra Libertad Soligo Takemoto; Nilceia Lopes da Silva; Ana Carolina Padula Ribeiro-Pereira; Arthur Orlando Correa Schilithz; Cibele Suzuki
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2015-08-06       Impact factor: 3.186

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.