Friction Cost Estimates of Productivity Costs in Cost-of-Illness Studies in Comparison with Human Capital Estimates: A Review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Pike J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6467569 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundProductivity costs result from loss of paid and unpaid work and replacements due to morbidity and mortality. They are usually assessed in health economic evaluations with human capital method (HCM) or friction cost method (FCM). The methodology for estimating lost productivity is an area of considerable debate.ObjectiveTo compare traditional and adjusted HCM and FCM productivity cost estimates among young stroke patients.MethodsThe Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966 was followed until the age of 50 to identify all 339 stroke patients whose productivity costs were estimated with traditional, occupation-specific and adjusted HCM and FCM models by using detailed, national register-based data on care, disability, mortality, education, taxation and labour market.ResultsCompared to traditional HCM, taking into account occupational class, national unemployment rate, disability-free life expectancy and decline in work ability, the productivity cost estimate decreased by a third, from €255,960 to €166,050. When traditional FCM was adjusted for occupational class and national unemployment rate, the estimate more than doubled from €3,040 to €7,020. HCM was more sensitive to adjustments for discount rate and wage growth rate than FCM.ConclusionsThis study highlights the importance of adjustments of HCM and FCM. Routine register-based data can be used for accurate productivity cost estimates of health shocks.
| S-EPMC8166714 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV can generate costs both within and outside the health sector (i.e. intersectoral costs). This systematic review aims (i) to explore the intersectoral costs associated with STIs and HIV considered in cost-of-illness (COI) studies, (ii) to categorise and analyse these costs according to cost sectors, and (iii) to illustrate the impact of intersectoral costs on the total cost burden.MethodsMedline (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit and NHS EED were searched between 2009 and 2019. Key search terms included terms for cost-of-illness, cost analysis and all terms for STIs including specific infections. Studies were included that assessed intersectoral costs. A standardised data extraction form was adopted. A cost component table was established based on pre-defined sector-specific classification schemes. Cost results for intersectoral costs were recorded. The quality of studies was assessed using a modified version of the CHEC-list.Results75 COI studies were considered for title/abstract screening. Only six studies were available in full-text and eligible for data extraction and narrative synthesis. Intersectoral costs were captured in the following sectors: Patient & family, Informal care and Productivity (Paid Labour). Patient & family costs were addressed in four studies, including patient out-of-pocket payments/co-payments and travel costs. Informal care costs including unpaid (home) care support by family/friends and other caregiver costs were considered in three studies. All six studies estimated productivity costs for paid labour including costs in terms of absenteeism, disability, cease-to-work, presenteeism and premature death. Intersectoral costs largely contributed to the total economic cost burden of STIs and HIV. The quality assessment revealed methodological differences.ConclusionsIt is evident that intersectoral costs associated with STIs and HIV are substantial. If relevant intersectoral costs are not included in cost analyses the total cost burden of STIs and HIV to society is severely underestimated. Therefore, intersectoral costs need to be addressed in order to ensure the total economic burden of STIs and HIV on society is assessed, and communicated to policy/decision-makers.
| S-EPMC8555721 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesOur aim was to estimate the productivity loss (PL) among patients with low back pain (LBP) or osteoarthritis (OA) across socioeconomic groups, using the friction-cost approach (FCA).MethodsA total of 175,550 patients aged 18-65 years were included at their first diagnosis in specialty care between 2011 and 2016. PL was calculated for the year following diagnosis using individual wages, while adjusting for the friction length at 78 days per episode, a team production multiplier at 1.6, compensation mechanisms of 26.8%, and a chain-of-vacancies multiplier at 3.95. We included a simpler FCA model, omitting the latter three parameters, and a human capital approach (HCA) model. Socioeconomic stratifications were created based on education and income. One-way sensitivity analysis was used to assess the influence of the parameters in the full FCA model.ResultsThe overall mean number of absent days was 23, while it was 25.3 and 20.1 for those with low and high education levels. The per-patient friction costs were €4395 among all patients and when extending the friction length to 98 days costs were €4342. For those with low and high education levels, the costs were €3671 and €4464, respectively. The costs in the simple FCA and HCA models were €1539 and €2088.DiscussionSocioeconomic status and model design are sources of variation in PL. In health economic applications with PL and in patient populations with large socioeconomic differences, adjusting for these factors may be as important as sensitivities in parameters such as the friction length.
| S-EPMC10449709 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this scoping review was to overview the cost-of-illness studies conducted in rare diseases.MethodsWe searched papers published in English in PubMed from January 2007 to December 2018. We selected cost-of-illness studies on rare diseases defined as those with prevalence lower than 5 per 10,000 cases. Studies were selected by one researcher and verified by a second researcher. Methodological characteristics were extracted to develop a narrative synthesis.ResultsWe included 63 cost-of-illness studies on 42 rare diseases conducted in 25 countries, and 9 systematic reviews. Most studies (94%) adopted a prevalence-based estimation, where the predominant design was cross-sectional with a bottom-up approach. Only four studies adopted an incidence-based estimation. Most studies used questionnaires to patients or caregivers to collect resource utilisation data (67%) although an important number of studies used databases or registries as a source of data (48%). Costs of lost productivity, non-medical costs and informal care costs were included in 68%, 60% and 43% of studies, respectively.ConclusionThis review found a paucity of cost-of-illness studies in rare diseases. However, the analysis shows that the cost-of-illness studies of rare diseases are feasible, although the main issue is the lack of primary and/or aggregated data that often prevents a reliable estimation of the economic burden.
| S-EPMC8045199 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhile health care and societal costs are routinely modelled for most diseases, there is a paucity of comprehensive data and cost-of-illness (COI) studies for inherited retinal diseases (IRDs). This lack of data can lead to underfunding or misallocation of resources. A comprehensive understanding of the COI of IRDs would assist governmental and healthcare leaders in determining optimal resource allocation, prioritizing funding for research, treatment, and support services for these patients.MethodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, a literature search was conducted using Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane databases, from database inception up to 30 Jun 2023, to identify COI studies related to IRD. Original studies in English, primarily including patients with IRDs, and whose main study objective was the estimation of the costs of IRDs and had sufficiently detailed methodology to assess study quality were eligible for inclusion. To enable comparison across countries and studies, all annual costs were standardized to US dollars, adjusted for inflation to reflect their current value and recalculated on a "per patient" basis wherever possible. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42023452986).ResultsA total of nine studies were included in the final stage of systematic review and they consistently demonstrated a significant disease burden associated with IRDs. In Singapore, the mean total cost per patient was roughly US$6926/year. In Japan, the mean total cost per patient was US$20,833/year. In the UK, the mean total cost per patient with IRD ranged from US$21,658 to US$36,549/year. In contrast, in the US, the mean total per-patient costs for IRDs ranged from about US$33,017 to US$186,051 per year. In Canada, these mean total per-patient costs varied between US$16,470 and US$275,045/year. Non-health costs constituted the overwhelming majority of costs as compared to healthcare costs; 87-98% of the total costs were due to non-health costs, which could be attributed to diminished quality of life, poverty, and increased informal caregiving needs for affected individuals.ConclusionIRDs impose a disproportionate societal burden outside health systems. It is vital for continued funding into IRD research, and governments should incorporate societal costs in the evaluation of cost-effectiveness for forthcoming IRD interventions, including genomic testing and targeted therapies.
| S-EPMC10905859 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a risk factor for several diseases and is correlated with other non-medical consequences that increase the disease's clinical and economic burden. However, OSA's impact is highly underestimated, also due to substantial diagnosis gaps.ObjectiveThis study aims at assessing the economic burden of OSA in the adult population in Italy by performing a cost-of-illness analysis with a societal perspective. In particular, we aimed at estimating the magnitude of the burden caused by conditions for which OSA is a proven risk factor.MethodsA systematic literature review on systematic reviews and meta-analyses, integrated by expert opinion, was performed to identify all clinical and non-clinical conditions significantly influenced by OSA. Using the Population Attributable Fraction methodology, a portion of their prevalence and costs was attributed to OSA. The total economic burden of OSA for the society was estimated by summing the costs of each condition influenced by the disease, the costs due to OSA's diagnosis and treatment and the economic value of quality of life lost due to OSA's undertreatment.ResultsTwenty-six clinical (e.g., diabetes) and non-clinical (e.g., car accidents) conditions were found to be significantly influenced by OSA, contributing to an economic burden ranging from €10.7 to €32.0 billion/year in Italy. The cost of impaired quality of life due to OSA undertreatment is between €2.8 and €9.0 billion/year. These costs are substantially higher than those currently borne to diagnose and treat OSA (€234 million/year).ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that the economic burden due to OSA is substantial, also due to low diagnosis and treatment rates. Providing reliable estimates of the economic impact of OSA at a societal level may increase awareness of the disease burden and help to guide evidence-based policies and prioritisation for healthcare, ultimately ensuring appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic pathways for patients.
| S-EPMC9122203 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Heart failure is a major and growing medical and economic problem worldwide as 1-2% of the healthcare budget are spent for heart failure. The prevalence of heart failure has increased over the past decades and it is expected that there will be further raise due to the higher proportion of elderly in the western societies. In this context cost-of-illness studies can significantly contribute to a better understanding of the drivers and problems which lead to the increasing costs in heart failure. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of published cost-of-illness studies related to heart failure to highlight the increasing cost impact of heart failure. METHODS:A systematic review was conducted from 2004 to 2016 to identify cost-of-illness studies related to heart failure, searching PubMed (Medline), Cochrane, Science Direct (Embase), Scopus and CRD York Database. RESULTS:Of the total of 16 studies identified, 11 studies reported prevalence-based estimates, 2 studies focused on incidence-based data and 3 articles presented both types of cost data. A large variation concerning cost components and estimates can be noted. Only three studies estimated indirect costs. Most of the included studies have shown that the costs for hospital admission are the most expensive cost element. Estimates for annual prevalence-based costs for heart failure patients range from $868 for South Korea to $25,532 for Germany. The lifetime costs for heart failure patients have been estimated to $126.819 per patient. CONCLUSIONS:Our review highlights the considerable and growing economic burden of heart failure on the health care systems. The cost-of-illness studies included in this review show large variations in methodology used and the cost results vary consequently. High quality data from cost-of-illness studies with a robust methodology applied can inform policy makers about the major cost drivers of heart failure and can be used as the basis of further economic evaluations.
| S-EPMC5930493 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AIM:To estimate the economic burden of common health problems associated with pregnancy and childbirth, such as incontinence, mental health problems, or gestational diabetes, excluding acute complications of labour or birth, or severe acute adverse maternal outcomes. METHODS:Searches for relevant studies were carried out to November 2019 in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and EconLit databases. After initial screening, all results were reviewed for inclusion by two authors. An adapted version of a previously developed checklist for cost-of-illness studies was used for quality appraisal. All costs were converted to 2018 Euro using national consumer price indices and purchasing power parity conversion factors. RESULTS:Thirty-eight relevant studies were identified, some of which reported incremental costs for more than one health problem (16 gestational diabetes, 13 overweight/obesity, 8 mental health, 4 hypertensive disorders, 2 nausea and vomiting, 2 epilepsy, 1 intimate partner violence). A high level of heterogeneity was observed in both the methods used, and the incremental cost estimates obtained for each morbidity. Average incremental costs tended to be higher in studies that modelled a hypothetical cohort of women using data from a range of sources (compared to analyses of primary data), and in studies set in the United States. No studies that examined the economic burden of some common pregnancy-related morbidities, such as incontinence, pelvic girdle pain, or sexual health problems, were identified. CONCLUSION:Our findings indicate that maternal morbidity is associated with significant costs to health systems and society, but large gaps remain in the evidence base for the economic burden of some common health problems associated with pregnancy and childbirth. More research is needed to examine the economic burden of a range of common maternal health problems, and future research should adopt consistent methodological approaches to ensure comparability of results.
| S-EPMC6964978 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSnakebite envenoming, a high priority Neglected Tropical Disease categorized by the World Health Organization (WHO), has been considered as a poverty-related disease that requires greater global awareness and collaboration to establish strategies that effectively decrease economic burdens. This prompts the need for a comprehensive review of the global literature that summarizes the global economic burden and a description of methodology details and their variation. This study aimed to systematically identify studies on cost of illness and economic evaluation associated with snakebites, summarize study findings, and evaluate their methods to provide recommendations for future studies.MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Econlit for articles published from inception to 31 July 2019. Original articles reporting costs or full economic evaluation related with snakebites were included. The methods and reporting quality were assessed. Costs were presented in US dollars (US$) in 2018.ResultsTwenty-three cost of illness studies and three economic evaluation studies related to snakebites were included. Majority of studies (18/23, 78.26%) were conducted in Low- and Middle-income countries. Most cost of illness studies (82.61%) were done using hospital-based data of snakebite patients. While, four studies (17.39%) estimated costs of snakebites in communities. Five studies (21.74%) used societal perspective estimating both direct and indirect costs. Only one study (4.35%) undertook incidence-based approach to estimate lifetime costs. Only three studies (13.04%) estimated annual national economic burdens of snakebite which varied drastically from US$126 319 in Burkina Faso to US$13 802 550 in Sri Lanka. Quality of the cost of illness studies were varied and substantially under-reported. All three economic evaluation studies were cost-effectiveness analysis using decision tree model. Two of them assessed cost-effectiveness of having full access to antivenom and reported cost-effective findings.ConclusionsEconomic burdens of snakebite were underestimated and not extensively studied. To accurately capture the economic burdens of snakebites at both the global and local level, hospital data should be collected along with community survey and economic burdens of snakebites should be estimated both in short-term and long-term period to incorporate the lifetime costs and productivity loss due to premature death, disability, and consequences of snakebites.
| S-EPMC7719278 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare disease cost estimates from two commonly used approaches.Data sourcePooled Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) data for 1998-2003.Study designWe compared regression-based (RB) and attributable fraction (AF) approaches for estimating disease-attributable costs with an application to diabetes. The RB approach used results from econometric models of disease costs, while the AF approach used epidemiologic formulas for diabetes-attributable fractions combined with the total costs for seven conditions that result from diabetes.Data extractionWe used SAS version 9.1 to create a dataset that combined data from six consecutive years of MEPS.Principal findingsThe RB approach produced higher estimates of diabetes-attributable medical spending ($52.9 billion in 2004 dollars) than the AF approach ($37.1 billion in 2004 dollars). RB model estimates may in part be higher because of the challenges of implementing the two approaches in a similar manner, but may also be higher because they capture the costs of increased treatment intensity for those with the disease.ConclusionsWe recommend using the RB approach for estimating disease costs whenever individual-level data on health care spending are available and when the presence of the disease affects treatment costs for other conditions, as in the case of diabetes.
| S-EPMC2669634 | biostudies-literature