The economic burden of the ankylosing spondylitis in the Czech Republic: comparison between 2005 and 2008
Language English Country Germany Media print-electronic
Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- MeSH
- Absenteeism MeSH
- Spondylitis, Ankylosing diagnosis economics epidemiology therapy MeSH
- Balneology economics MeSH
- Time Factors MeSH
- Models, Economic MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Drug Costs MeSH
- Health Care Costs * MeSH
- Sick Leave economics MeSH
- Prevalence MeSH
- Cross-Sectional Studies MeSH
- Efficiency MeSH
- Insurance, Health economics MeSH
- Health Resources economics statistics & numerical data MeSH
- Check Tag
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
- Geographicals
- Czech Republic epidemiology MeSH
To investigate the burden of ankylosing spondylitis in the Czech Republic as a baseline for future health economic evaluations. Data were obtained from two cross-sectional studies Beda I (2005) and Beda II (2008), performed in 1,008 and 509 patients, respectively. Methodology used was Cost-of-Illness prevalence-based analysis bottom-up approach. Analysis was performed from payer (health insurance companies) and societal perspective (including productivity costs using friction cost approach). Mean age of sample in Beda I and Beda II was 50.2 and 52.5 years, male were present by 61.0 and 62.7 %; average disease duration was 23.0 and 26.4 years, respectively. Mean total annual costs per patient in the sample were €4,782 in Beda I and €5806 in Beda II. Average direct costs per patient in the sample per year are estimated at €1,812 (Beda I) and €2,588 (Beda II) with the average productivity costs €2,970 (Beda I) and €3,218 (Beda II). We observed a small decrement in percentage (6.7 %) of productivity costs for Beda II as an influence of higher consumption of biologic drugs, hence higher direct costs and possible productivity preservation. The largest direct cost burdens were spa procedures (45.3 %, Beda I) and biological drugs (52.8 %, Beda II). Unique analysis of the burden of the AS in the Central-Eastern Europe presents health care resource and cost consumption by comparing two cross-sectional prevalence-based studies. Further analysis should be carried to obtain data connecting health status with costs consumption in order to analyse the AS from this perspective.
See more in PubMed
J Rheumatol. 1994 Dec;21(12):2286-91 PubMed
Vnitr Lek. 2006 Jul-Aug;52(7-8):726-9 PubMed
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2005 Jul;44(7):939-47 PubMed
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2004 Sep;43(9):1158-66 PubMed
Clin Rheumatol. 2008 Aug;27(8):1005-13 PubMed
Scand J Rheumatol. 2010 Aug;39(4):310-7 PubMed
Pharmacoeconomics. 2011 Aug;29(8):653-71 PubMed
J Rheumatol Suppl. 2006 Sep;78:4-11 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2002 May;61(5):429-37 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2003 Sep;62(9):817-24 PubMed
Health Technol Assess. 2007 Aug;11(28):1-158, iii-iv PubMed
Value Health. 2008 May-Jun;11(3):408-15 PubMed
Arthritis Rheum. 1980 Feb;23(2):137-45 PubMed
Value Health. 2010 Jan-Feb;13(1):8-13 PubMed
J Rheumatol. 2006 Feb;33(2):289-95 PubMed
Value Health. 2008 Jul-Aug;11(4):637-44 PubMed
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2008 Jan;47(1):68-71 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2003 Aug;62(8):732-40 PubMed
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2006 Sep-Oct;24(5):499-507 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2006 Apr;65(4):442-52 PubMed
