scholarly journals Direct Costs And Healthcare Resource Use Associated With Advanced Melanoma In Portugal

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. A466
Author(s):  
F Lopes ◽  
MJ Passos ◽  
A Raimundo ◽  
PA Laires
2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (7) ◽  
pp. A742
Author(s):  
B Leeneman ◽  
M Franken ◽  
A Jochems ◽  
M Schouwenburg ◽  
M Aarts ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey D. Greenberg ◽  
Jacqueline B. Palmer ◽  
Yunfeng Li ◽  
Vivian Herrera ◽  
Yuen Tsang ◽  
...  

Objective.Direct costs of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) have not been well characterized in the United States. This study assessed healthcare resource use and direct cost of AS and PsA, and identified predictors of all-cause medical and pharmacy costs.Methods.Adults aged ≥ 18 with a diagnosis of AS and PsA were identified in the MarketScan databases between October 1, 2011, and September 30, 2012. Patients were continuously enrolled with medical and pharmacy benefits for 12 months before and after the index date (first diagnosis). Baseline demographics and comorbidities were identified. Direct costs included hospitalizations, emergency room and office visits, and pharmacy costs. Multivariable regression was used to determine whether baseline covariates were associated with direct costs.Results.Patients with AS were younger and mostly men compared with patients with PsA. Hypertension and hyperlipidemia were the most common comorbidities in both cohorts. A higher percentage of patients with PsA used biologics and nonbiologic disease-modifying drugs (61.1% and 52.4%, respectively) compared with patients with AS (52.5% and 21.8%, respectively). Office visits were the most commonly used resource by patients with AS and PsA (∼11 visits). Annual direct medical costs [all US dollars, mean (SD)] for patients with AS and PsA were $6514 ($32,982) and $5108 ($22,258), respectively. Prescription drug costs were higher for patients with PsA [$14,174 ($15,821)] compared with patients with AS [$11,214 ($14,249)]. Multivariable regression analysis showed higher all-cause direct costs were associated with biologic use, age, and increased comorbidities in patients with AS or PsA (all p < 0.05).Conclusion.Biologic use, age, and comorbidities were major determinants of all-cause direct costs in patients with AS and PsA.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S702-S703
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Thompson ◽  
Alen Marijam ◽  
Fanny S Mitrani-Gold ◽  
Jonathon Wright ◽  
Ashish V Joshi

Abstract Background Uncomplicated urinary tract infections (uUTI) account for a large proportion of primary care antibiotic (AB) prescriptions. This study assessed uUTI-related healthcare resource use (HRU) and costs in US females with a self-reported uUTI. Methods We surveyed US females aged ≥ 18 years who participated in web-based surveys (fielded August 28–September 28, 2020 by Dynata, EMI, Lucid/Federated, and Kantar Profiles). Participants had a self-reported uUTI ≤ 60 days prior, and took ≥ 1 oral AB for their uUTI. Those reporting signs of complicated UTI were excluded. HRU was measured via self-reported primary care provider (PCP), specialist, urgent care, emergency room (ER) visits, and hospitalizations. Direct costs were calculated as sum of self-reported and HRU monetized with Medical Expenditure Panel Survey estimates. Indirect costs were calculated via Work Productivity and Impairment metrics monetized with Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates. Participants were stratified by number of oral ABs prescribed (1/2/3+) and therapy appropriateness (1 AB [1st line/2nd line]/multiple [any line] AB) for most recent uUTI. Multivariable regression modeling was used to compare strata; 1:1 propensity score matching assessed uUTI burden vs matched population (derived from the 2020 National Health and Wellness Survey [NHWS]). Results In total, 375 participants were eligible for this analysis. PCP visits (68.8%) were the most common HRU. Across participants, there were an average of 1.46 PCP, 0.31 obstetrician/gynecologist, 0.41 urgent care and 0.08 ER visits, and 0.01 hospitalizations for most recent uUTI (Table 1). Total mean uUTI-related direct and indirect costs were &1289 and &515, respectively (Table 1). Adjusted mean total direct costs were significantly higher (Table 2) for participants in the ‘2 AB’ cohort vs the ‘1 AB’ cohort (&2090 vs &776, p &lt; 0.0001), and for the ‘multiple AB’ vs ‘1 AB, 1st line’ cohorts (&1642 vs &875, p=0.002). Participants in the uUTI cohort reported worse absenteeism (+15.3%), presenteeism (+46.5%), overall work impairment (+52.4%), and impact on daily activities (+50.7%) vs NHWS cohort (p &lt; 0.0001, Table 3). Table 1. Overall mean uUTI-related healthcare resource use, direct, and indirect cost data Table 2. Estimated uUTI-related direct costs stratified by (A) number of AB and (B) appropriateness of AB therapy used to treat last uUTI Table 3. Mean Work Productivity and Activity Impairment data for uUTI and NHWS cohorts Conclusion Inadequate treatment response, evident by multiple AB use, was associated with an increase in uUTI-related costs, including productivity loss. Disclosures Jeffrey Thompson, PhD, Kantar Health (Employee, Employee of Kantar Health, which received funding from GlaxoSmithKline plc. to conduct this study) Alen Marijam, MSc, GlaxoSmithKline plc. (Employee, Shareholder) Fanny S. Mitrani-Gold, MPH, GlaxoSmithKline plc. (Employee, Shareholder) Jonathon Wright, BSc, Kantar Health (Employee, Employee of Kantar Health, which received funding from GlaxoSmithKline plc. to conduct this study) Ashish V. Joshi, PhD, GlaxoSmithKline plc. (Employee, Shareholder)


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 513.2-513
Author(s):  
M. Bergman ◽  
L. Zhou ◽  
P. Patel ◽  
R. Sawant ◽  
J. Clewell ◽  
...  

Background:Guidelines recommend sustained remission as a treatment goal for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, only one-third of patients are known to achieve this goal with current treatments. A few studies have evaluated the impact of remission in a real-world setting, but evidence is limited to the elderly population.Objectives:To understand the impact of remission on healthcare costs by comparing overall and RA-related direct healthcare costs and resource use in patients with RA who maintain vs those who do not maintain remission using a real-world database.Methods:Data for this retrospective cohort study were derived from Optum electronic health records linked to claims from commercial and Medicare Advantage health plans in the United States. Patients with ≥2 diagnoses for RA, ≥1 Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28-CRP/ESR) or Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) measurement, and continuous medical and pharmacy coverage 6 months before and 1 year after the index date were included. Two cohorts were created: remission and non-remission. Remission was defined as DAS28 <2.6 or RAPID3 ≤3.0. In the remission cohort, the index date was defined as the first date remission was achieved. In the non-remission cohort, the index date was defined as the first date of DAS28 or RAPID3 measurement. Outcomes were all-cause and RA-related total, medical, and prescription costs; healthcare resource use (number of inpatient, emergency department [ED], outpatient, and other visits); and number of prescriptions within 1 year of index date. A weighted generalized linear model and binomial regression were used to estimate adjusted annual direct costs and healthcare resource use, respectively. Confounding between cohorts due to age, sex, race and comorbidities using the Elixhauser index was controlled for in the models.Results:A total of 335 patients with RA (remission cohort: 125; non-remission cohort: 210) met the study inclusion criteria. Annual all-cause total direct costs in the remission cohort were significantly less than in the non-remission cohort ($30,427 vs $38,645, respectively; cost ratio (CR)=0.79; 95% CI: 0.63, 0.99). All-cause medical costs were significantly lower in the remission cohort than in the non-remission cohort (Figure 1); furthermore, among all-cause medical costs, outpatient visit costs were significantly lower in the remission than in the non-remission cohort. All-cause resource use (mean number of visits) was less in the remission vs non-remission cohort: inpatient (0.23 vs 0.63; visit ratio (VR)=0.36; 95% CI: 0.19, 0.70), ED (0.36 vs 0.77; VR=0.47; 95% CI: 0.30, 0.74), and outpatient visits (20.7 vs 28.5; VR=0.73; 95% CI: 0.62, 0.86). Annual RA-related total direct costs were similar in both cohorts (Figure 2); however, RA-related medical costs were numerically lower in the remission vs non-remission cohort ($8,594 vs $10,002, respectively; CR=0.86; 95% CI: 0.59, 1.25). RA-related resource use (mean number of visits) was less in the remission vs non-remission cohort: inpatient (0.15 vs 0.22; VR=0.67; 95% CI: 0.35, 1.30), ED (0.04 vs 0.13; VR=0.31; 95% CI: 0.10, 0.95), and outpatient visits (5.4 vs 7.4; VR=0.72; 95% CI: 0.58, 0.91).Conclusion:Significant economic burden was associated with patients who did not maintain remission compared with those who maintained remission. Although outpatient visits were the driver of medical costs in both groups studied in this analysis, the contribution of outpatient visits was greater among those who did not maintain remission.Acknowledgments:Financial support for the study was provided by AbbVie. AbbVie participated in the interpretation of data, review, and approval of the abstract. All authors contributed to the development of the publication and maintained control over the final content. Medical writing services were provided by Joann Hettasch of JK Associates Inc., a member of the Fishawack Group of Companies, and funded by AbbVie.Disclosure of Interests:Martin Bergman Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson – stockholder, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Genentech, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi – consultant, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene Corporation, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi – speakers bureau, Lili Zhou Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Pankaj Patel Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Ruta Sawant Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Jerry Clewell Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Namita Tundia Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document