| Literature DB >> 24954169 |
Dmitrij Achelrod1, Carl Rudolf Blankart, Roland Linder, Yskert von Kodolitsch, Tom Stargardt.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Marfan syndrome is a rare disease of the connective tissues, affecting multiple organ systems. Elevated morbidity and mortality in these patients raises the issue of costs for sickness funds and society. To date, there has been no study analysing the costs of Marfan syndrome from a sickness fund and societal perspective.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24954169 PMCID: PMC4082619 DOI: 10.1186/1750-1172-9-90
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Orphanet J Rare Dis ISSN: 1750-1172 Impact factor: 4.123
Cost categories from sickness fund and societal perspectives
| | | |
| Inpatient treatment | ✓| ✓ | ✓| ✓a |
| Outpatient treatment | ✓| ✓ | ✓| ✓a |
| Care by non-physicians | ✓| ✓ | ✓| ✓ |
| Pharmaceuticals | ✓| ✓ | ✓| ✓a |
| Devices and medical appliances | ✓| ✓ | ✓| ✓ |
| Rehabilitation | ✓| ✓ | ✓| ✓ |
| Medical services (nursing care at home) | ✓| ✓ | ✓| ✓ |
| | | |
| Administration | ✓| ✓ | ✓| ✓ |
| Sick leave compensation | ✓| ✓ | ✗| ✗ |
| Travel expenses | ✓| ✓ | ✓| Ⓧb |
| Other non-medical services | ✓| ✓ | ✓| Ⓧb |
| Informal care by family caregivers | ✗| ✗ | ✓| ✓ |
| Patient time (loss of leisure time) | ✗| ✗ | ✓| ✗ |
| | | |
| Reduced productivity at work | ✗| ✗ | ✓| ✗ |
| Lost production (absence, disability, premature death) | ✗| ✗ | ✓| ✓ |
The first sign reflects the relevance of the cost item from the respective perspective, whereas the second sign reflects whether the item is included in this analysis.
✓relevant | included; ✗ not relevant | not included; Ⓧ partially included.
acomprises patient co-payments in addition; bonly comprises costs borne by sickness fund.
Overview of two approaches for measuring indirect costs
| • considers | • considers patient’s hours of work that are lost until | |
| • measured through patient’s lost earnings (valued at 100%) no cap on duration of absence from work | • measured through patient’s lost earnings (valued at 80%) absence from work capped at 76 days (friction period) | |
| • value of lost hours of work (=earnings) that would have accumulated until patient’s retirement age | • value of lost hours of work (=earnings) + value of lost hours of work for a full friction period (valued at 100%) |
Figure 1Overview of the steps in the statistical analysis/matching procedure.
Baseline characteristics of the Marfan syndrome patients and control group and balancing tests pre and post genetic matching
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample size (N) | | | | |
| before matching | 892 | 26,645 | – | – |
| after matching | 892 | 892 | – | – |
| Mean age (years) | | | | |
| before matching | 28.95 | 50.50 | 0.389 | <0.001 |
| after matching | 28.95 | 28.90 | 0.002 | 0.996 |
| % female | | | | |
| before matching | 40.70 | 50.45 | – | <0.001 |
| after matching | 40.70 | 40.70 | – | 1 |
| Mean propensity score | | | | |
| before matching | 0.116 | 0.029 | 0.470 | 0.002 |
| after matching | 0.116 | 0.116 | 0.002 | 0.999 |
| Elixhauser comorbidities | | | | |
| before matching | 15 of 29 significantly different at p < 0.05 | |||
| after matching | 0 of 29 significantly different at p < 0.05 | |||
| Pharmacy-based classes | | | | |
| before matching | 16 of 30 significantly different at p < 0.05 | |||
| after matching | 0 of 30 significantly different at p < 0.05 | |||
aD-statistic represents the maximum difference in the empirical cumulative distribution function (eQQ statistic).
bp-value: paired t-test for dichotomous and KS test for continuous variables.
Average treatment effects for the treated (excess costs) in € (per capita, in 2008)
| | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outpatient treatment | 780 | 512 | 268 | *** | 35 | 800 | 531 | 269 | *** | 35 |
| Pharmaceuticals | 385 | 241 | 145 | ** | 46 | 349 | 222 | 127 | ** | 39 |
| Care by non-physicians | 1315 | 472 | 843 | *** | 163 | 1353 | 501 | 851 | *** | 165 |
| Devices and medical appliances | 142 | 76 | 66 | *** | 18 | 122 | 65 | 57 | *** | 15 |
| Inpatient treatment | 1337 | 379 | 958 | *** | 164 | 1413 | 403 | 1010 | *** | 173 |
| Rehabilitation | 66 | 14 | 52 | *** | 15 | 67 | 14 | 53 | *** | 16 |
| Medical services | <1 | 1 | −1 | | 5 | <1 | 1 | −1 | | 2 |
| Administration | 192 | 192 | 0 | | 0 | 192 | 192 | 0 | | 0 |
| Sick leave compensation | 161 | 18 | 143 | *** | 34 | n/a | n/a | n/a | | n/a |
| Travel expenses | 39 | 15 | 24 | *** | 7 | 39 | 15 | 24 | ** | 9 |
| Other non-medical services | <1 | <1 | <1 | | <1 | <1 | <1 | <1 | | <1 |
| Informal family care | n/a | n/a | n/a | | n/a | 7200 | 1349 | 5851 | *** | 116 |
| | ||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| Sick leave days | 9.23 | 5.02 | 4.21 | *** | 1.11 | | | | | |
| Physician contacts | 10.11 | 7.28 | 2.83 | *** | 0.26 | | | | | |
| Average length of stay | 3.06 | 1.21 | 1.85 | *** | 0.52 | | | | | |
| Inpatient stays | 0.39 | 0.18 | 0.21 | *** | 0.04 | | | | | |
| Prescriptions | 8.70 | 6.52 | 2.18 | *** | 0.49 | | | | | |
| Average prescription cost | 27.58 | 23.04 | 4.55 | | 3.61 | | | | | |
| MRT/CT imaging | 0.37 | 0.11 | 0.26 | *** | 0.05 | |||||
aaverage treatment effect for the treated represents excess resource utilisation attributable to Marfan.
bAbadie–Imbens standard errors take the uncertainty of the matching process into consideration [57].
**< 0.01 ***< 0.001.
Figure 2Total costs per capita for Marfan syndrome patients and control individuals, from the sickness fund perspective.
Sensitivity and secondary analyses with propensity score matching and friction cost model (values per capita in 2008)
| | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | | |
| Direct medical costs | 2330 | 2024 | −13.14 | 2330 | 0 |
| Direct non-medical costs | 167 | 161 | −3.58 | 167 | 0 |
| Total costs | 2496 | 2184 | −12.49 | 2496 | 0 |
| | | | | | |
| Direct medical costs | 2366 | 2059 | −12.97 | 2366 | 0 |
| Direct non-medical costs | 5875 | 5790 | −1.44 | 5875 | 0 |
| Indirect costs | 7487 | 7573 | 1.15 | 359 | −95.26 |
| Total costs | 15,728 | 15,422 | −1.95 | 8599 | −44.24 |
aaverage treatment costs of the treated (ATT) represent excess costs attributable to Marfan.
bpercentage change compared with baseline GM model.