Economic and social cost of epilepsy in Poland: 5-year analysis

Composition and influencing factors of hospitalization expenses for epilepsy patients based on path analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to understand the composition and influencing factors of epilepsy patients' hospitalization expenses, thus providing a reference for reducing the disease burden of epilepsy patients in low- and middle-income developing countries.

METHODS

A total of 4206 hospitalized cases of epilepsy from 2018 to 2020 were collected. Descriptive statistics were used to understand the patient cost composition, path analysis was used to understand the direct and indirect factors of hospitalization expenses.

RESULTS

From 2018 to 2020, the average hospitalization expenses for epilepsy patients was 4,299.93 RMB yuan, and the average length of stay was 2.47 days. The highest proportion of hospitalization expenses was diagnosis costs (> 50%), followed by comprehensive medical service costs and drug costs. In terms of the total effect coefficient, the major factors affecting the hospitalization expenses were length of stay (0.880), emergency admission(0.463), and the comorbidities and complications(> 0.250). Hospital length of stay, discharge mode(death) and number of hospitalizations(2 times) affect hospitalization expenses through direct effect. Long-term hospitalization (> 30 days), admission routes(emergency), the comorbidities and complications, presence of drug allergy, and age also affect hospitalization expenses through indirect effects.

CONCLUSION

Diagnosis costs and length of stay are important factors affecting the medical expenses of epilepsy inpatients. In general, the quality control of the hospital is good, but it still needs to standardize the diagnosis and treatment behavior of medical staff through the clinical path.

Improving epilepsy diagnosis across the lifespan: approaches and innovations

Epilepsy diagnosis is often delayed or inaccurate, exposing people to ongoing seizures and their substantial consequences until effective treatment is initiated. Important factors contributing to this problem include delayed recognition of seizure symptoms by patients and eyewitnesses; cultural, geographical, and financial barriers to seeking health care; and missed or delayed diagnosis by health-care providers. Epilepsy diagnosis involves several steps. The first step is recognition of epileptic seizures; next is classification of epilepsy type and whether an epilepsy syndrome is present; finally, the underlying epilepsy-associated comorbidities and potential causes must be identified, which differ across the lifespan. Clinical history, elicited from patients and eyewitnesses, is a fundamental component of the diagnostic pathway. Recent technological advances, including smartphone videography and genetic testing, are increasingly used in routine practice. Innovations in technology, such as artificial intelligence, could provide new possibilities for directly and indirectly detecting epilepsy and might make valuable contributions to diagnostic algorithms in the future.

Societal costs of illness for infantile epileptic spasms syndrome and evolutionary cost prediction in the era of WHO's IGAP

BACKGROUND

To achieve the goal of improving the quality of life for persons with epilepsy within the framework of the WHO's Intersectoral Global Action Plan (IGAP), our study aimed to assess the societal financial burden linked to infantile epileptic spasms syndrome (IESS), ensuring that children afflicted with IESS receive high-quality healthcare without enduring substantial financial constraints.

METHODS

Between August 2022 and March 2023, 92 children with IESS (male: female: 2:1), recently diagnosed or previously followed-up, were recruited. We gathered costs for drugs, tests, and medical services, along with legal guardians' monthly income. Total expenditure was determined by multiplying unit costs by the yearly service usage commencing from the onset. Time series analysis was utilised to forecast the financial burden from 2022 to 2032.

RESULTS

Clinicians' first choice of treatment was ACTH (n = 60, 65·2%), prednisolone (n = 25, 27·2%), and vigabatrin (n = 7, 7·6%) and the median cost of treatment during the initial year was INR 39,010 [USD 479·2]. The median direct medical, direct non-medical, and indirect cost were INR 31,650 [USD 388·4], INR 6581 [USD 80·8], and INR 10,100 [USD 124·07], respectively. Families lost a median of 12 days of work annually. Drug costs and loss of wages were the key factors in the financial burden. The projected and adjusted figures exhibited an incremental growth rate of 2·6% tri-annually.

INTERPRETATION

This pioneering study in developing countries, the first of its kind, evaluates the societal cost, financial hardship, and trajectory of incremental cost in IESS. The primary drivers of the financial burden were pharmacological treatment and family work adjustments. The government shoulders 62% of the financial burden, and projected a triannual growth of 2·6% from 2022 to 2032. Our results rationalize policymakers' focus on incorporating IESS into social security programs, particularly in developing countries.

Economic aspects of treating seizure clusters

Seizure clusters may initiate a chain of events that have economic as well as clinical consequences. The potential economic consequences of seizure clusters must be weighed against the cost of medication to attenuate them. This is true both for individual patients and for society. Data needed for economic analyses include the chance that a cluster will progress to an adverse outcome, such as a need for emergency care, the costs of such an outcome, the cost of a rescue medication (RM), and the effectiveness of the RM. Indirect costs, such as lost employment for patients and caregivers, must also be considered. Several types of economic analyses can be used to determine costs and benefits of a medical intervention. There are studies comparing different RMs from an economic perspective, but there is little direct information on the costs of using an RM versus allowing clusters to run their course. However, the high expense of consequences of seizure clusters makes it likely that effective RMs will make economic as well as medical sense for many patients.

Trends in resource utilization and cost of illness in patients with active epilepsy in Germany from 2003 to 2020

OBJECTIVE

To calculate epilepsy-related direct, indirect, and total costs in adult patients with active epilepsy (ongoing unprovoked seizures) in Germany and to analyze cost components and dynamics compared to previous studies from 2003, 2008 and 2013. This analysis was part of the Epi2020 study.

METHODS

Direct and indirect costs related to epilepsy were calculated with a multicenter survey using an established and validated questionnaire with a bottom-up design and human capital approach over a 3-month period in late 2020. Epilepsy-specific costs in the German health care sector from 2003, 2008 and 2013 were corrected for inflation to allow for a valid comparison.

RESULTS

Data on the disease-specific costs for 253 patients in 2020 were analyzed. The mean total costs were calculated at € 5,551 (± € 5,805; median: € 2,611; range: € 274 to € 21,667) per three months, comprising mean direct costs of € 1,861 (± € 1,905; median: € 1,276; range: € 327 to € 13,158) and mean indirect costs of € 3,690 (± € 5,298; median: € 0; range: € 0 to € 11,925). The main direct costs components were hospitalization (42.4%), anti-seizure medication (42.2%) and outpatient care (6.2%). Productivity losses due to early retirement (53.6%), part-time work or unemployment (30.8%) and seizure-related off-days (15.6%) were the main reasons for indirect costs. However, compared to 2013, there was no significant increase of direct costs (-10.0%), and indirect costs significantly increased (p<0.028, +35.1%), resulting in a significant increase in total epilepsy-related costs (p<0.047, +20.2%). Compared to the 2013 study population, a significant increase of cost of illness could be observed (p=0.047).

SIGNIFICANCE

The present study shows that disease-related costs in adult patients with active epilepsy increased from 2013 to 2020. As direct costs have remained constant, this increase is attributable to an increase in indirect costs. These findings highlight the impact of productivity loss caused by early retirement, unemployment, working time reduction and seizure-related days off.

Cost-effectiveness of perampanel as an adjunctive treatment for uncontrolled focal seizures in pediatric patients: a Chinese perspective

Background

The incidence of epilepsy is 41-187 per 100,000 person-year in children. The health care costs for children with uncontrolled epilepsy is a huge burden. Perampanel (PER) was effective, safety and well-tolerated as add-on therapy in pediatric patients aged 4 to <12 years with uncontrolled focal seizures. However, there is still limited evidence on cost-effectiveness of PER in pediatric patients. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PER as an add-on therapy for pediatric patients with uncontrolled focal seizures.

Methods

A Markov model was established to conduct an analysis from the perspective of the Chinese health system and society. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of patients using PER and conventional therapy versus patients using conventional therapy alone were estimated and compared. The transition probability of the response level, health state utility values, and costs were derived from clinical trials and the literature. Costs, including medical, drug, transportation and indirect costs, were calculated. We performed 1-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. A subgroup analysis of different ages was also conducted.

Results

The base-case analysis indicated that compared to maintaining conventional therapy, adding PER as an adjuvant drug therapy had an increased cost of $3,449.85 over 5 years, with an incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALY) value of 0.40, resulting in an ICER of $8,582.58 per additional QALY. The health state utility value had the greatest effect on the ICER. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that the probability of PER being cost-effective was 76.72% at a willingness-to-pay of $11,293/QALY. The ICER of the subgroup ranged from $7,167.95/QALY to $19,710.96/QALY.

Conclusions

Our study demonstrated that PER is a cost-effective add-on therapy for pediatric patients.

The economic burden of newly diagnosed epilepsy in Spain

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the hospital burden and economic impact of epilepsy in adults in Spain and identify characteristics associated with higher direct medical costs.

METHOD

Patients newly diagnosed with epilepsy at the outpatient epilepsy unit of a tertiary hospital in Spain in 2012 were included. Sociodemographic and clinical data and use of health resources were collected retrospectively from electronic medical records from the time of diagnosis to the end of follow-up (2019). Direct costs (in 2012 Euro) were estimated and linear regression models built to explore predictors of higher costs.

RESULTS

We studied 110 patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy. Their mean (SD) age was 52.6 (19.6) years and 53.6% were men. Eighty-nine patients (80.9%) had focal epilepsy and 45 (40.9%) had an unknown etiology. At 6 months, 79.1% of patients were classified as responders and 17.6% as having drug-resistant epilepsy. The mean direct cost in the first year of epilepsy diagnosis was €3816.06, 49.7% of which was due to hospital admissions. The mean annual cost per patient was €2584.17, 51.4% of which was due to anti-seizure medications (ASMs). Focal epilepsy and poor response in the first 6 months of treatment predicted higher annual costs, while focal epilepsy and pre-existing comorbidities predicted higher costs in the first year.

CONCLUSIONS

The direct cost of newly diagnosed epilepsy in adults in our area is €2584 per patient/year. Anti-seizure medication use is the main cost driver. Focal epilepsy, comorbidities, and poor response to ASMs are independent predictors of higher costs.

Diagnostic Delay in Epilepsy: the Scope of the Problem

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Diagnostic delay is an increasingly recognized issue in epilepsy. At the same time, there is a clear disparity between public awareness of epilepsy and that of other public health issues. A contributing factor for this seems to be a lack of studies testing interventions designed to improve seizure recognition. In this review, we summarize the main findings from recent studies investigating diagnostic delay in epilepsy, highlighting causes, consequences, and potential interventions in future research that may improve quality of care in this population.

RECENT FINDINGS

Building on prior evidence, diagnostic delay in patients with new-onset focal epilepsy has been identified as an important problem for patients with epilepsy. Such delay in diagnosis can lead to delayed treatment and potentially preventable morbidity and mortality including motor vehicle accidents. Nonmotor seizure semiology appears to be a major contributor for delay; such seizures are largely unrecognized when patients present to emergency departments for care. Improving recognition and diagnosis of recurrent nonmotor seizures in emergency departments represents a significant opportunity for improving time to diagnosis, particularly when patients present following a first lifetime motor seizure and meet diagnostic criteria for epilepsy. Diagnostic delay in epilepsy is a significant public health issue and recent studies have highlighted potential areas for intervention.