Rito Bergemann

Costs of irritable bowel syndrome in the UK and US

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is one of the most common functional gastrointestinal disorders, with an estimated prevalence rate in the general population of 10–15% in industrialised countries. Although IBS is not a life-threatening disease, it contributes significantly to a large segment of healthcare resource consumption. This review provides an overview of studies addressing the direct and indirect costs of IBS in the US and the UK. A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE and the Cochrane library; additionally, all reference lists covering the years from 1960 to May 2004 were scanned.Twenty-four publications for the US and the UK, published between 1991 and 2003, were identified: 6 were excluded, 18 were included. Data for the UK, US and UK + US were reported in 5, 11 and 2 publications, respectively. Total direct cost estimates per patient per year ranged from

Economic burden of obesity and its complications in Germany

US348 to

Economic Evaluation of Collagenase-Containing Ointment and Hydrocolloid Dressing in the Treatment of Pressure Ulcers

US8750 (calculated for year 2002). The average number of days off work per year because of IBS was between 8.5 and 21.6; indirect costs ranged from

International Variation in Resource Utilisation and Treatment Costs for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Literature Review

US355 to

Economic Evaluation of the Treatment of Chronic Wounds Hydroactive Wound Dressings in Combination with Enzymatic Ointment Versus Gauze Dressings in Patients with Pressure Ulcer and Venous Leg Ulcer in Germany

US3344.The total costs and cost components of IBS are influenced by several factors: features of the investigated patient group (age, limitation to healthcare seekers or all IBS patients, comorbidity, severity of symptoms), database used, method of data collection (retrospective or prospective, varying cost components, time-point of data collection in relation to index-date of IBS diagnosis, method of cost calculation [incidence or prevalence based]) and different healthcare systems in the US and the UK. These factors led to the incomparability of published data, thus no comprehensive picture can be drawn of the total costs related to IBS in the UK and US. Data underline the magnitude of the economic impact of IBS in the UK and US, which is increased by a factor of 1.1–6.0, compared with matched non-IBS control groups.IBS contributes both direct and indirect costs to the total healthcare bill. Further studies should take influencial factors into account and report related data carefully in order to provide useful and comparable published cost data. Additionally, further research on the cost effectiveness of diagnostic procedures and therapies in IBS is required to define strategies to help IBS patients improve their quality of life and reduce related costs.

Influenza treatment with neuraminidase inhibitors

This study estimated the economic burden of illness of obesity and selected comorbidities in terms of health outcome and costs to society and healthcare payer in Germany. The proportions of selected diseases (comorbidities) attributable solely to obesity were estimated using odds ratios/relative risks and prevalences based on data from the literature. The top-down approach was employed to match healthcare spending with the number of patients suffering from obesity (BMI 30+) and the major comorbidities to evaluate overall direct and indirect costs. In Germany there are approximately 12.24 million obese adults, 2.06–3.76 million of whom suffer from the selected comorbidities. From a societal perspective the total costs for obesity and comorbidities are €2,701–5,682 million per year and the direct treatment costs alone account for €1,343–2,699 million, imposing a major burden to the healthcare system. In view of the magnitude of the economic burden of illness there is a need for both further research and action at the health policy level.

Health-Economic Comparison of Paricalcitol, Calcitriol and Alfacalcidol for the Treatment of Secondary Hyperparathyroidism during Haemodialysis

AbstractObjective: To evaluate the efficacy and cost effectiveness of two treatments of pressure sores on the heel: a collagenase-containing ointment and a hydrocolloid dressing. Design: Study and cost data were collected prospectively in a randomised clinical trial in The Netherlands by counting the resource use for each patient until wound healing occurred. Study participants: All 24 female study participants were inpatients from the same hospital with grade IV pressure sores on the heel following orthopaedic surgery. Interventions: Two different treatment strategies were analysed: a collagenase-containing ointment (Novuxol®) and a hydrocolloid dressing (Duoderm®).1Perspective: Hospital perspective. Main outcome measures and results: The average costs per patient for treatment with the hydrocolloid dressing were about 5% higher than those with the collagenase-containing ointment. The treatment costs were similarly distributed within both groups, with 34% for materials and 66% for personnel. The cost-effectiveness analysis revealed that cost savings of 899 Dutch guilders (1998 values) per successfully treated patient could be expected using the collagenase-containing ointment instead of the hydrocolloid dressing. In addition, wound healing was achieved, on average, within a shorter time period with the collagenase treatment (10 weeks) compared with the hydrocolloid treatment (14 weeks). The robustness of the results were also tested using sensitivity analyses. These analyses served to confirm that collagenase treatment provides a better cost-effectiveness ratio than hydrocolloid treatment. Conclusions: With regard to overall costs and costs per successfully treated patient, this study showed collagenase treatment to be more cost effective than the hydrocolloid treatment in patients with grade IV pressure sores on the heel and that the amount of time needed for wound healing was shorter.

Cost-effectiveness of Capsule Endoscopy in Diagnosing Obscure Gastrointestinal Bleeding: An International Comparison

Recent years have witnessed substantial progress in understanding the cost implications of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To assess the divergent methodologies and their impact on the resulting cost analyses in RA, we conducted a systematic literature review to summarise the scientific evidence of RA-induced costs.Sixty-five reviews, models or cost analyses on the burden of illness and general costs associated with RA were identified. They covered the US, Canada, Sweden, the UK, The Netherlands, Germany and Finland. Twenty-four cost analyses provided appropriate data about direct and/or indirect costs. Each study was summarised separately. Costs were discounted to 2003 and converted to US dollars.The costs per RA-year ranged from

Prediction of acute and chronic complications by a new computer simulation model for type 1 and type 2 diabetes: the Diabetes Mel l it us Model (DMM)

US1503 to

Diabetes Mel l it us Model (DMM): internal validation of a computer simulation model for type 1 and type 2 diabetes

US16 514. However, each study has to be interpreted individually, with consideration given to the study population, indication, age of the study, database used, type of therapy, setting, level of cost differentiation and data derivation. Health technology assessment reports offer sufficient space to adequately describe the composite parts and restrictive elements of different methodological approaches and analyses.