RESUMEN
Background: This study aimed to evaluate differences in healthcare resource utilization and cost among patients with controlled and uncontrolled asthma.Methods: Claims data from a German sickness fund was linked to patient survey data. Outpatient physicians enrolled patients and assessed asthma control using the ACTTM questionnaire. All-cause and asthma-specific healthcare resource use (HCRU)/costs were compared descriptively and based on multivariable models using a continuous ACTTM score.Results: Overall, 492 asthma patients were included (mean age: 53.8, 73.8% female). The mean/median ACTTM score was 19.9/20.7, with 183 patients (37.2%) classified as having uncontrolled asthma (mean ACTTM score<20) Patients with uncontrolled asthma had significantly more hospitalizations (p = .035) and medication prescriptions (p < .001), which resulted in higher total healthcare costs for asthma-related (1785 vs. 1615; p = .004) and all-cause care (4695 vs. 4117; p = .009). While controlling for baseline characteristics, multivariable models confirmed a negative association between asthma control and total all-cause healthcare costs (p = .008), total asthma-related costs (p = .008), and costs of medication prescriptions (p = .001). However, no significant association was found for all-cause (p = .062) and asthma-related hospitalization costs (p = .576).Conclusion: Considering continuous patient care, improving asthma control is not only desirable from a clinical perspective, but could also be an effective approach to reduce asthma-related HCRU and cost burden.
Asunto(s)
Asma , Web Semántica , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Atención a la Salud , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Aceptación de la Atención de SaludRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Understanding patient preferences for attributes of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) medications may help explain how the attributes differentially affect patient perceptions and behaviors. In this survey, we quantified the relative preferences among patients in Germany and Spain in separate analyses. METHODS: A stated-preference, discrete-choice experiment (DCE) survey was designed to elicit preferences for T2DM treatment attributes among patients with self-reported T2DM and who reported being prescribed T2DM medication for > 2 years. Patients recruited from an online national consumer panel completed an online survey. The survey presented choices between eight pairs of hypothetical T2DM treatments defined by seven attributes: chance of reaching target hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level; reduced risk of serious heart attack or stroke; frequency of hypoglycemia; risk of gastrointestinal (GI) problems; weight change; mode of administration (oral or injectable); dosing frequency. Data were analyzed using random-parameters logit. Minimum acceptable benefit (MAB) was defined as the minimum increase in the probability of reaching target HbA1c for which respondents would accept less desirable levels of other attributes. RESULTS: In Germany and Spain, 474 and 401 respondents completed the survey, respectively. DCE analysis showed that risk of GI problems was most important to German respondents. MAB analysis found that respondents would require a 56 percentage point increase in the probability of reaching their HbA1c target to offset a change from 0% to 30% risk of GI problems. For Spanish respondents, mode of administration was the most important attribute. These respondents would require a 59 percentage point increase in the probability of reaching their HbA1c target to offset moving from oral to injectable medications. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents in Germany and Spain were willing to trade efficacy for improvements in side effects and mode of administration. Given the variety of T2DM medications currently available, the results suggest that careful discussion about patient preferences could help improve patient satisfaction with T2DM treatment.
RESUMEN
The authors estimated the lost productive time (LPT) due to absenteeism and presenteeism among employees at the Group Health Cooperative with controlled and uncontrolled hypertension compared with normotensive patients. The patients responded to a survey inquiring about health behaviors with links to their medical record to identify diagnoses, blood pressure measurement, and prescription drug dispenses. Individuals with controlled hypertension were more likely to report any LPT relative to individuals with uncontrolled hypertension (40.6% vs 32.6%, P<.05). There were no significant differences in the average hours of LPT due to presenteeism among individuals regardless of their hypertension status but individuals with hypertension were more likely to report hours of LPT due to absenteeism compared with normotensive individuals (1.04 vs 0.59 hours; P=.001). Individuals with uncontrolled hypertension were more likely to report LPT due to absenteeism compared with individuals with controlled hypertension (1.35 vs 0.72 hours; P=.001). There were no significant differences between individuals with hypertension whose blood pressure was controlled and normotensive individuals with respect to the likelihood of reporting any LPT or in the amounts of absenteeism and presenteeism.