Cost consequences analysis of hypertensive outpatients: a study in a private hospital in Yogyakarta special province

Background: Hypertension is a chronic disease that requires long-term treatment and has an impact on the cost of treatment. The costs will be greater given the loss of productivity, family burden, and social life impacted by hypertension based on patient’s perspective. Objective: The purpose of the study was to determine the costs and clinical outcome of antihypertensive therapy from the patient's perspective and to identify the discrepancies between the costs and the INA-CBGs (Indonesia Case Based Groups) tariff. Methods: The research was an observational study with a cross-sectional design. The targeted population was outpatients who had received antihypertensive therapy for at least 1 month at a private hospital in Yogyakarta. The costs included direct medical costs, direct non-medical costs, and indirect costs, while the clinical outcomes were patient’s blood pressure. The descriptive analysis was carried out to describe the characteristics of the research subjects, the clinical outcome, and the cost. Analysis of the discrepancies between the costs and the INA-CBGs tariff used the Mann-Whitney test and One-Sample t-test. Results: The results showed that the average direct medical costs, direct non-medical costs, and indirect costs from the patient’s perspective were IDR359,408.00, IDR24,617.00, and IDR 40,583.00, respectively. There was a significant difference between the real costs and the rate of INA-CBGs based on the results of statistical tests, while the cost discrepancy was IDR5,287,045.00. Conclusion: The direct non-medical costs and indirect costs of hypertensive outpatients were less than the direct medical costs. A significant difference occurred between the real costs and INA CBG’s tariff. Keywords: hypertension, cost consequences, pharmacoeconomics, patient’s perspective

In search of a gold standard patient-reported outcome measure to use in the evaluation and treatment-decision making in migraine prevention. A real-world evidence study

Background Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) have been developed to numerically quantify disability, impact and quality of life. They have been widely used in migraine clinical trials. However, we still do not know which PRO more accurately reflects preventive treatment response from a patient’s perspective or which one may help us with treatment decisions in clinical practice. They have been used to enforce the efficacy results in clinical trials and real-world evidence so far. The aim of this study was to analyze which PROM is (1) better correlated with all primary efficacy endpoints and (2) which one is better associated with treatment continuation with CGRP-mAbs at week-12, which is usually the moment when this decision is made. Methods Patients with migraine who had received 3 administrations of CGRP-mAbs were evaluated in this prospective cohort study. Primary efficacy outcomes considered: a change in migraine days (MMD), headache days (MHD), pain intensity (INT), acute medication days (AMD) and 50% responder rate. The Spearman coefficient (rs) was the measure used for quantify the strength of the correlation between PROMs and treatment efficacy outcomes changes. A stepwise logistic regression identified which PROM was independently associated with treatment continuation at week-12. Results 263 patients completed 12 weeks of treatment. The efficacy outcomes and PROMs scores were statistically significantly reduced at week-12 for all patients. The role function-restrictive (RFR) domain of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life (MSQ) questionnaire was statistically significantly correlated with all primary efficacy outcomes. Relative changes in MSQ total score (OR[95%]: 0.840[0.619-0.973]; p=0.037) and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale (OR[95%]: 15.569[6.254-31.533]; p<0.001) were the PROMs associated with treatment continuation as independent factors at week-12. Conclusions Changes in MSQ questionnaire and PGIC scale at week-12 were the PROMs with higher association with CGRP-mAbs response from a patient’s perspective and medical decision-taking.