Background:Spondyloarthritis refers to a family of diseases, of which ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis are responsible for axial impairment. Previously, the only treatment available were NSAIDs, which control activity and stop radiological progression, but at the expense of increased adverse effects, such as cardiovascular risk, dyspepsia and chronic renal failure. For the past 2 decades, biological therapy has been available, which means an increase in care costs.Objectives:The objective of this study is to perform a budget impact analysis of biologic therapy.Methods:To do a budget impact analysis from the perspective of the payer, comparing biological therapy with coventional therapy for the treatment of spondyloarthritis. Demographic characterization of the population attended at the Central Military Hospital. Time horizon from 2012 to 2018, taking the activity count according to the hospital’s billing and the prices of the activities of the state body SISMED. Exchange rates at the end of 2018.Results:The patients attended were 117, mostly men (63, 25%), average age 46, 4 years (SD 13), with disease diagnosis time of 9, 8 years (SD 9, 6). In the budget impact analysis, it is observed that 25% of patients were on DMARDs therapy, 22% with NSAIDs and 96% with biologic therapy. The average year/patient cost with NSAIDs alone would be EUR 381, with DMARDs only EUR 9,318 and, if only biological therapy was used, EUR 423. Within the total number of patients, the average annual cost, including the possibility of combining these drugs, amounted to EUR 5,403Conclusion:Including biological therapy in the care of patients with spondyloarthritis can increase up to 24 times the annual cost per patient. This increase is not only due to higher market value, it also relates to the need for more medical procedures and diagnostic follow-up tests.References:[1]Strömbeck, et al. Cost of Illness from the Public Payers’ Perspective in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis in Rheumatological Care. J Rheumatol 2010;37;2348-2355.Disclosure of Interests:None declared
PMD9 INTRODUCING BUDGET IMPACT ANALYSIS COMPARING REUSABLE TO SINGLE-USE BRONCHOSCOPES WITHIN A LARGE UK UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL
