Carl Rudolf Blankart
University of Hamburg
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Carl Rudolf Blankart.
JAMA | 2016
Justin E. Bekelman; Scott D. Halpern; Carl Rudolf Blankart; Julie P. W. Bynum; Joachim Cohen; Robert Fowler; Stein Kaasa; Lukas Kwietniewski; Hans Olav Melberg; Bregje D. Onwuteaka-Philipsen; Mariska G. Oosterveld-Vlug; Andrew Pring; Jonas Schreyögg; Connie M. Ulrich; Julia Verne; Hannah Wunsch; Ezekiel J. Emanuel
IMPORTANCE Differences in utilization and costs of end-of-life care among developed countries are of considerable policy interest. OBJECTIVE To compare site of death, health care utilization, and hospital expenditures in 7 countries: Belgium, Canada, England, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, and the United States. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Retrospective cohort study using administrative and registry data from 2010. Participants were decedents older than 65 years who died with cancer. Secondary analyses included decedents of any age, decedents older than 65 years with lung cancer, and decedents older than 65 years in the United States and Germany from 2012. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Deaths in acute care hospitals, 3 inpatient measures (hospitalizations in acute care hospitals, admissions to intensive care units, and emergency department visits), 1 outpatient measure (chemotherapy episodes), and hospital expenditures paid by insurers (commercial or governmental) during the 180-day and 30-day periods before death. Expenditures were derived from country-specific methods for costing inpatient services. RESULTS The United States (cohort of decedents aged >65 years, N = 211,816) and the Netherlands (N = 7216) had the lowest proportion of decedents die in acute care hospitals (22.2.% and 29.4%, respectively). A higher proportion of decedents died in acute care hospitals in Belgium (N = 21,054; 51.2%), Canada (N = 20,818; 52.1%), England (N = 97,099; 41.7%), Germany (N = 24,434; 38.3%), and Norway (N = 6636; 44.7%). In the last 180 days of life, 40.3% of US decedents had an intensive care unit admission compared with less than 18% in other reporting nations. In the last 180 days of life, mean per capita hospital expenditures were higher in Canada (US
PharmacoEconomics | 2011
Carl Rudolf Blankart; Tom Stargardt; Jonas Schreyögg
21,840), Norway (US
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases | 2013
Carl Rudolf Blankart; Taika Koch; Roland Linder; Frank Verheyen; Jonas Schreyögg; Tom Stargardt
19,783), and the United States (US
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care | 2015
Oriana Ciani; Britni Wilcher; Carl Rudolf Blankart; Maximilian H. M. Hatz; Valentina Prevolnik Rupel; Renata Slabe Erker; Yauheniya Varabyova; Rod S. Taylor
18,500), intermediate in Germany (US
Health Policy | 2012
Carl Rudolf Blankart
16,221) and Belgium (US
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases | 2014
Dmitrij Achelrod; Carl Rudolf Blankart; Roland Linder; Yskert von Kodolitsch; Tom Stargardt
15,699), and lower in the Netherlands (US
Health Economics | 2017
Yauheniya Varabyova; Carl Rudolf Blankart; Jonas Schreyögg
10,936) and England (US
Health Care Management Science | 2017
Carl Rudolf Blankart; Tom Stargardt
9342). Secondary analyses showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients older than 65 years who died with cancer in 7 developed countries in 2010, end-of-life care was more hospital-centric in Belgium, Canada, England, Germany, and Norway than in the Netherlands or the United States. Hospital expenditures near the end of life were higher in the United States, Norway, and Canada, intermediate in Germany and Belgium, and lower in the Netherlands and England. However, intensive care unit admissions were more than twice as common in the United States as in other countries.
Health Care Management Science | 2017
Yauheniya Varabyova; Carl Rudolf Blankart; Jonas Schreyögg
AbstractBackground: Market authorization does not guarantee patient access to any given drug. This is particularly true for costly orphan drugs because access depends primarily on co-payments, reimbursement policies and prices. The objective of this article is to identify differences in the availability of orphan drugs and in patient access to them in 11 pharmaceutical markets: Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, Switzerland and the US. Methods: Four rare diseases were selected for analysis: pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), Fabry disease (FD), hereditary angioedema (HAE) and chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML). Indicators for availability were defined as (i) the indications for which orphan drugs had been authorized in the treatment of these diseases; (ii) the application date; and (iii) the date upon which these drugs received market authorization in each country. Indicators of patient access were defined as (i) the outcomes of technology appraisals; (ii) the extent of coverage provided by healthcare payers; and (iii) the price of the drugs in each country. For PAH we analysed bosentan, iloprost, sildenafil, treprostinil (intravenous and inhaled) as well as sitaxentan and ambrisentan; for FD we analysed agalsidase alfa and agalsidase beta; for HAE we analysed icatibant, ecallantide and two complement C1s inhibitors; for CML we analysed imatinib, dasatinib and nilotinib. Results: Most drugs included in this study had received market authorization in all countries, but the range of indications for which they had been authorized differed by country. The broadest range of indications was found in Australia, and the largest variations in indications were found for PAH drugs. Authorization process speed (the time between application and market authorization) was fastest in the US, with an average of 362 days, followed by the EU (394 days). The highest prices for the included drugs were found in Germany and the US, and the lowest in Canada, Australia and England. Although the prices of all of the included drugs were high compared with those of most non-orphan drugs, most of the insurance plans in our country sample provided coverage for authorized drugs after a certain threshold. Conclusions: Availability of and access to orphan drugs play a key role in determining whether patients will receive adequate and efficient treatment. Although the present study showed some variations between countries in selected indicators of availability and access to orphan drugs, virtually all of the drugs in question were available and accessible in our sample. However, substantial co-payments in the US and Canada represent important barriers to patient access, especially in the case of expensive treatments such as those analysed in this study.Market exclusivity is a strong instrument for fostering orphan drug development and drug availability. However, despite the positive effect of this instrument, the conditions under which market exclusivity is granted should be reconsidered in cases where the costs of developing an orphan drug have already been amortized through the use of the drug’s active ingredient for the treatment of a common indication.
Value in Health | 2010
Carl Rudolf Blankart; Tom Stargardt; Jonas Schreyögg
BackgroundChronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a slowly progressing but fatal disease that imposes a high economic burden on sickness funds and society. The objective of this study was to analyze and compare the direct and indirect costs of CLL in Germany from the perspective of the sickness funds and society and analyze the burden of the disease.MethodsUsing a database of 7.6 million enrolled individuals, we identified 4198 CLL patients in 2007 and 2008. The costs attributable to CLL were estimated using a case–control design with a randomly selected control group of 150 individuals per combination of age and sex. We used the bootstrap approach to estimate uncertainties in costs estimated. We employed generalized estimating equation regression models and count data models to test for differences in costs and healthcare utilization.ResultsThe cost attributable to CLL for each prevalent case amounts to €4946 from the payer’s perspective and €7910 from a societal perspective. Inpatient hospital stays and pharmaceuticals are the main cost drivers of the disease. The economic burden of disease in Germany was estimated to be approximately €201 million per year for the sickness funds and €322 million for society.ConclusionsCompared with common diseases, such as diabetes or COPD, the economic burden of CLL is considerably lower. However, the cost of treatment per case is about twice as high as the cost per case for these common diseases, even though treatment is only performed in the later stages of CLL. With new healthcare technologies, the aging population, and the increasing incidence of the disease, it is likely that the economic burden of the disease will continue to grow.