Dataset Information

The economic costs of chronic pain among a cohort of treatment-seeking adolescents in the United States.

ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to assess the economic cost of chronic pain among adolescents receiving interdisciplinary pain treatment. Information was gathered from 149 adolescents (ages 10-17) presenting for evaluation and treatment at interdisciplinary pain clinics in the United States. Parents completed a validated measure of family economic attributes, the Client Service Receipt Inventory, to report on health service use and productivity losses due to their child's chronic pain retrospectively over 12 months. Health care costs were calculated by multiplying reported utilization estimates by unit visit costs from the 2010 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. The estimated mean and median costs per participant were $11,787 and $6,770, respectively. Costs were concentrated in a small group of participants; the top 5% of those patients incurring the highest costs accounted for 30% of total costs, whereas the lower 75% of participants accounted for only 34% of costs. Total costs to society for adolescents with moderate to severe chronic pain were extrapolated to $19.5 billion annually in the United States. The cost of adolescent chronic pain presents a substantial economic burden to families and society. Future research should focus on predictors of increased health services use and costs in adolescents with chronic pain.This cost of illness study comprehensively estimates the economic costs of chronic pain in a cohort of treatment-seeking adolescents. The primary driver of costs was direct medical costs followed by productivity losses. Because of its economic impact, policy makers should invest resources in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of chronic pediatric pain.

SUBMITTER: Groenewald CB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4150826 | biostudies-other | 2014 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The economic costs of chronic pain among a cohort of treatment-seeking adolescents in the United States.

Groenewald Cornelius B CB Essner Bonnie S BS Wright Davene D Fesinmeyer Megan D MD Palermo Tonya M TM

The journal of pain 20140619 9

<h4>Unlabelled</h4>The aim of this study was to assess the economic cost of chronic pain among adolescents receiving interdisciplinary pain treatment. Information was gathered from 149 adolescents (ages 10-17) presenting for evaluation and treatment at interdisciplinary pain clinics in the United States. Parents completed a validated measure of family economic attributes, the Client Service Receipt Inventory, to report on health service use and productivity losses due to their child's chronic pa ...[more]

PMID: 24953887

Similar Datasets

Project description:STUDY DESIGN:A descriptive analysis of secondary data. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to estimate health care costs and opioid use for those with high-impact chronic spinal (back and neck) pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:The US National Pain Strategy introduced a focus on high-impact chronic pain-that is, chronic pain associated with work, social, and self-care restrictions. Chronic neck and low-back pain are common, costly, and associated with long-term opioid use. Although chronic pain is not homogenous, most estimates of its costs are averages that ignore severity (impact). METHODS:We used 2003 to 2015 Medical Expenditures Panel Survey (MEPS) data to identify individuals with chronic spinal pain, their health care expenditures, and use of opioids. We developed prediction models to identify those with high- versus moderate- and low-impact chronic spinal pain based on the variables available in MEPS. RESULTS:We found that overall and spine-related health care costs, and the use and dosage of opioids increased significantly with chronic pain impact levels. Overall and spine-related annual per person health care costs for those with high-impact chronic pain ($14,661 SE: $814; and $5979 SE: $471, respectively) were more than double that of those with low-impact, but still clinically significant, chronic pain ($6371 SE: $557; and $2300 SE: $328). Those with high-impact chronic spinal pain also use spine-related opioids at a rate almost four times that of those with low-impact pain (48.4% vs. 12.4%), and on average use over five times the morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) in mg (15.3 SE: 1.4 vs. 2.7 SE: 0.6). Opioid use and dosing increased significantly across years, but the increase in inflation-adjusted health care costs was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION:Although most studies of chronic spinal pain do not differentiate participants by the impact of their chronic pain, these estimates highlight the importance of identifying chronic pain levels and focusing on those with high-impact chronic pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:3.

Project description:PurposeAlthough chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome is a prevalent urological disorder among men of all ages, its etiology remains unknown. Only a few previous studies have examined associations between lifestyle factors and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome, of which most were limited by the cross-sectional study design and lack of control for possible confounders. To address these limitations we performed a cohort study of major lifestyle factors (obesity, smoking and hypertension) and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome risk in the HPFS (Health Professionals Follow-up Study), a large ongoing cohort of United States based male health professionals.Materials and methodsThe HPFS includes 51,529 men who were 40 to 75 years old at baseline in 1986. At enrollment and every 2 years thereafter participants have completed questionnaires on lifestyle and health conditions. In 2008 participants completed an additional set of questions on recent chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome pain symptoms modified from the NIH (National Institutes of Health)-CPSI (Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index) as well as questions on approximate date of symptom onset. The 653 participants with NIH-CPSI pain scores 8 or greater who first experienced symptoms after 1986 were considered incident chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome cases and the 19,138 who completed chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome questions but did not report chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome related pain were considered noncases.ResultsNo associations were observed for baseline body mass index, waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio, cigarette smoking and hypertension with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome risk (each OR ≤1.34).ConclusionsIn this large cohort study none of the lifestyle factors examined was associated with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome risk. As the etiology of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome remains unknown, additional prospective studies are needed to elucidate modifiable risk factors for this common condition.

Project description:IMPORTANCE:Primary care clinicians find managing chronic pain challenging. Evidence of long-term efficacy of opioids for chronic pain is limited. Opioid use is associated with serious risks, including opioid use disorder and overdose. OBJECTIVE:To provide recommendations about opioid prescribing for primary care clinicians treating adult patients with chronic pain outside of active cancer treatment, palliative care, and end-of-life care. PROCESS:The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) updated a 2014 systematic review on effectiveness and risks of opioids and conducted a supplemental review on benefits and harms, values and preferences, and costs. CDC used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to assess evidence type and determine the recommendation category. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS:Evidence consisted of observational studies or randomized clinical trials with notable limitations, characterized as low quality using GRADE methodology. Meta-analysis was not attempted due to the limited number of studies, variability in study designs and clinical heterogeneity, and methodological shortcomings of studies. No study evaluated long-term (?1 year) benefit of opioids for chronic pain. Opioids were associated with increased risks, including opioid use disorder, overdose, and death, with dose-dependent effects. RECOMMENDATIONS:There are 12 recommendations. Of primary importance, nonopioid therapy is preferred for treatment of chronic pain. Opioids should be used only when benefits for pain and function are expected to outweigh risks. Before starting opioids, clinicians should establish treatment goals with patients and consider how opioids will be discontinued if benefits do not outweigh risks. When opioids are used, clinicians should prescribe the lowest effective dosage, carefully reassess benefits and risks when considering increasing dosage to 50 morphine milligram equivalents or more per day, and avoid concurrent opioids and benzodiazepines whenever possible. Clinicians should evaluate benefits and harms of continued opioid therapy with patients every 3 months or more frequently and review prescription drug monitoring program data, when available, for high-risk combinations or dosages. For patients with opioid use disorder, clinicians should offer or arrange evidence-based treatment, such as medication-assisted treatment with buprenorphine or methadone. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:The guideline is intended to improve communication about benefits and risks of opioids for chronic pain, improve safety and effectiveness of pain treatment, and reduce risks associated with long-term opioid therapy.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The United States is the only high-income nation without universal, government-funded or -mandated health insurance employing a unified payment system. The US multi-payer system leaves residents uninsured or underinsured, despite overall healthcare costs far above other nations. Single-payer (often referred to as Medicare for All), a proposed policy solution since 1990, is receiving renewed press attention and popular support. Our review seeks to assess the projected cost impact of a single-payer approach. METHODS AND FINDINGS:We conducted our literature search between June 1 and December 31, 2018, without start date restriction for included studies. We surveyed an expert panel and searched PubMed, Google, Google Scholar, and preexisting lists for formal economic studies of the projected costs of single-payer plans for the US or for individual states. Reviewer pairs extracted data on methods and findings using a template. We quantified changes in total costs standardized to percentage of contemporaneous healthcare spending. Additionally, we quantified cost changes by subtype, such as costs due to increased healthcare utilization and savings due to simplified payment administration, lower drug costs, and other factors. We further examined how modeling assumptions affected results. Our search yielded economic analyses of the cost of 22 single-payer plans over the past 30 years. Exclusions were due to inadequate technical data or assuming a substantial ongoing role for private insurers. We found that 19 (86%) of the analyses predicted net savings (median net result was a savings of 3.46% of total costs) in the first year of program operation and 20 (91%) predicted savings over several years; anticipated growth rates would result in long-term net savings for all plans. The largest source of savings was simplified payment administration (median 8.8%), and the best predictors of net savings were the magnitude of utilization increase, and savings on administration and drug costs (R2 of 0.035, 0.43, and 0.62, respectively). Only drug cost savings remained significant in multivariate analysis. Included studies were heterogeneous in methods, which precluded us from conducting a formal meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS:In this systematic review, we found a high degree of analytic consensus for the fiscal feasibility of a single-payer approach in the US. Actual costs will depend on plan features and implementation. Future research should refine estimates of the effects of coverage expansion on utilization, evaluate provider administrative costs in varied existing single-payer systems, analyze implementation options, and evaluate US-based single-payer programs, as available.

Project description:BackgroundCigarette smoking is an established cause of preventable death and often initiated during adolescence. We estimated the short- and long-term costs of cigarette smoking among currently smoking adolescents in Nigeria.MethodsA cross-sectional survey among adolescents in Oyo state, Nigeria and a review of mortality records of patients managed for lung cancer in a tertiary facility in Ibadan, Nigeria were conducted. Short-term costs estimated were: (a) average weekly costs of purchasing cigarettes by currently smoking adolescents, and (b) costs of managing at least an episode of chronic cough occurring within 12 months of the survey. Long-term costs were limited to: (a) life-time expenditure on purchasing cigarettes, and (b) direct medical and non-medical (transportation) costs of managing lung cancer. Long-term costs were first projected to the approximate year when the adolescents (mean age:16.0 ± 1.8 years) might be diagnosed with lung cancer based on the average age at presentation with symptoms of lung cancer obtained from the records (59.8 years), and then discounted to 2020 prices. This was estimated as 44 years from the base year (2020). Costs were reported in 2020 prices in Nigerian Naira (NGN) and US dollar (USD) equivalent using the Central Bank of Nigeria, June 2020 exchange rate of USD 1: NGN 360.50.ResultsApproximately 3.8% of the adolescents were current cigarette smokers. Average weekly expenditure on cigarettes was NGN 306.82 ± 5.74 (USD 0.85 ± 0.02). About 26% had experienced at least an episode of chronic cough which cost them an average of NGN 1226.81 ± 6.18 (USD 3.40 ± 0.02) to manage. Total future costs of cigarette smoking in 2020 prices for the 43 adolescents who were current smokers in the event that they develop lung cancer were approximately NGN 175.7 million (USD 487.3 thousand), NGN 871.8 million (USD 2.4 million) and NGN 4.6 trillion (USD 12.7 million) at assumed annual inflation rates of 10%, 15%, and 20% respectively and discount rate of 4.25%.ConclusionThe estimated economic costs of smoking were very high. Efforts to prevent smoking initiation among adolescents in our study area should be intensified. Interventions to subsidize the medical cost of health-related consequences of cigarette smoking are also required, especially as treatment costs are currently largely borne out-of-pocket.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10389-021-01644-5.

Dataset Information

The economic costs of chronic pain among a cohort of treatment-seeking adolescents in the United States.

Publications

The economic costs of chronic pain among a cohort of treatment-seeking adolescents in the United States.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets