M Sørensen1, F Arneberg2, T M Line2, T J Berg3. 1. Dept. of Minority Health and Rehabilitation, Division of Primary Healthcare, Norwegian Directorate of Health, Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: monica.sorensen@helsedir.no. 2. Division of Financing and Health Economics, Norwegian Directorate of Health, Oslo, Norway. 3. Dept. of Minority Health and Rehabilitation, Division of Primary Healthcare, Norwegian Directorate of Health, Oslo, Norway; Dept. of Endocrinology, Oslo University Hospital, Aker, Oslo, Norway; Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Norway.
Abstract
AIMS: To quantify the excess cost of diabetes in Norway in 2011. METHODS: A national cross-sectional cost-of-illness analysis of direct and indirect diabetes-related healthcare costs, based on pseudonymised data from six public national registers, international studies, and clinical expertise. Direct medical costs are estimated from primary and secondary health care registers and the national prescription database. Indirect costs include social and productivity costs. RESULTS: The total excess cost of diabetes in Norway in 2011 was €516 million. Direct costs amounted to €408 million and indirect costs amounted to €108 million. Scenario analysis proposes an upper boundary of total cost at €575 million, direct costs at €428 million and indirect costs at €161 million. Expenditure on blood glucose lowering agents was €71 million and expenditure on blood glucose monitoring strips was €55 million. Blood glucose lowering agents-, lipid lowering agents, and antihypertensives represented 28% of the direct costs. Loss of productivity (€0.9 million) scored highest among the indirect costs. CONCLUSIONS: The cost implications of diabetes in Norway in 2011 were high and comparable to previous studies in Scandinavia. Prevention of complications contributed to a higher cost than treating diabetes-related complications. The more than five-fold higher expenditure in other countries might be due to differences in budget priorities, efficacy of healthcare, indirect healthcare cost applications, or research methodology.
AIMS: To quantify the excess cost of diabetes in Norway in 2011. METHODS: A national cross-sectional cost-of-illness analysis of direct and indirect diabetes-related healthcare costs, based on pseudonymised data from six public national registers, international studies, and clinical expertise. Direct medical costs are estimated from primary and secondary health care registers and the national prescription database. Indirect costs include social and productivity costs. RESULTS: The total excess cost of diabetes in Norway in 2011 was €516 million. Direct costs amounted to €408 million and indirect costs amounted to €108 million. Scenario analysis proposes an upper boundary of total cost at €575 million, direct costs at €428 million and indirect costs at €161 million. Expenditure on blood glucose lowering agents was €71 million and expenditure on blood glucose monitoring strips was €55 million. Blood glucose lowering agents-, lipid lowering agents, and antihypertensives represented 28% of the direct costs. Loss of productivity (€0.9 million) scored highest among the indirect costs. CONCLUSIONS: The cost implications of diabetes in Norway in 2011 were high and comparable to previous studies in Scandinavia. Prevention of complications contributed to a higher cost than treating diabetes-related complications. The more than five-fold higher expenditure in other countries might be due to differences in budget priorities, efficacy of healthcare, indirect healthcare cost applications, or research methodology.
Authors: Hongying Hao; Stephen Nicholas; Lizheng Xu; Anli Leng; Jingjie Sun; Zhiyan Han Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-05-12 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Paola Rucci; Vera Maria Avaldi; Claudio Travaglini; Cristina Ugolini; Elena Berti; Maria Luisa Moro; Maria Pia Fantini Journal: Pharmacoecon Open Date: 2020-03
Authors: Ali Naseribafrouei; Bent-Martin Eliassen; Marita Melhus; Johan Svartberg; Ann Ragnhild Broderstad Journal: Int J Circumpolar Health Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 1.228
Authors: Ernest O Asante; Yi-Qian Sun; Tom Ivar Lund Nilsen; Bjørn Olav Åsvold; Elin Pettersen Sørgjerd; Xiao-Mei Mai Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-03-25 Impact factor: 2.692