Economic burden and health-related quality of life associated with Prader-Willi syndrome in France.

BACKGROUND: To date, there has been no published comprehensive estimation of costs related to Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS). Our objective was therefore to provide data on the economic burden and health-related quality of life associated with PWS in France in order to raise awareness of the repercussions on individuals suffering from this syndrome and on caregivers as well as on the health and social care systems. METHOD: A retrospective cross-sectional study was carried out on 51 individuals recruited through the French PWS patient association. Data on their demographic characteristics and resource use were obtained from an online questionnaire, and costs were estimated by a bottom-up approach. The EQ-5D-5L health questionnaire was used to measure the health-related quality of life of individuals suffering from PWS and their caregivers. RESULTS: The average annual cost of PWS was estimated at €58 890 per individual, with direct healthcare accounting for €42 299, direct non-healthcare formal costs €13 865 and direct non-healthcare informal costs €8459. The main contributors to PWS costs were hospitalisations and social services. Indirect costs resulting from loss of productivity in the labour market was €32 542 for adults suffering from PWS. Mean EQ-5D utility scores were 0.4 for individuals with PWS and 0.7 for caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: Prader-Willi syndrome represents a major economic burden from a societal perspective and has a significant impact on health-related quality of life both for individuals suffering from PWS and for their caregivers in France. These results underscore the need to develop tailored policies targeted at improving care. Likewise, a larger study collecting a broader range of medical characteristics should be undertaken to achieve more precise estimations.

Fragile X syndrome: economic burden and health-related quality of life of patients and caregivers in France.

BACKGROUND: Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is the main hereditary cause of intellectual disability. Although the associated burden appears to be considerable, to date no study has comprehensively assessed the cost incurred because of FXS, including its specific impact on health-related quality of life and the burden on caregivers using standardised quantitative tools. The aim of this article is to provide data in order to increase awareness of the repercussions of FXS on patients and caregivers as well as on the health and social care systems in France. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study was carried out on 145 patients recruited through Le Goëland X-Fragile and Mosaïques, the French FXS patient associations. Data on their demographic characteristics and resource use were obtained from an online questionnaire, and costs were estimated by a bottom-up approach. The EQ-5D health questionnaire was used to measure patients' and caregivers' health-related quality of life. Perceived burden of care was measured using the Zarit Caregiver Burden Interview. The Barthel index, a non-utility-based assessment, was used to measure patients' level of dependence. RESULTS: The annual total direct cost of FXS was estimated at €25 800 per patient. The main contributors were informal care provided by the main caregiver (€10 500) and social services (€8400). Healthcare costs, estimated at €2700, represented only a minor share. Mean EQ-5D utility scores were 0.49 for patients and 0.75 for caregivers. The mean burden for caregivers as measured by the Zarit Caregiver Burden Interview was 39.9. CONCLUSIONS: Fragile X syndrome requires significant resources that are mainly of a non-medical nature and are higher for children than for adults. Compared with related diseases, it constitutes a particularly high burden for caregivers. Using a bottom-up approach and a wide range of standardised measures, this study underscores the need for greater awareness of the burden of FXS as well as an assessment of new and existing interventions to address it.

The diversity of regulation and public financing of IVF in Europe and its impact on utilization.

STUDY QUESTION: How do the different forms of regulation and public financing of IVF affect utilization in otherwise similar European welfare state systems? SUMMARY ANSWER: Countries with more liberal social eligibility regulations had higher levels of IVF utilization, which diminished as the countries' policies became more restrictive. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Europe is a world leader in the development and utilization of IVF, yet surveillance reveals significant differences in uptake among countries which have adopted different approaches to the regulation and and public financing of IVF. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A descriptive and comparative analysis of legal restrictions on access to IVF in 13 of the EU15 countries that affirmatively regulate and publicly finance IVF. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Using 2009 data from the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology study of regulatory frameworks in Europe and additional legislative research, we examined and described restrictions on access to IVF in terms of general eligibility, public financing and the scope of available services. Multiple correspondence analysis was used to identify patterns of regulation and groups of countries with similar regulatory patterns and to explore the effects on utilization of IVF, using data from the most recent European and international IVF monitoring reports. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Regulations based on social characteristics of treatment seekers who are not applicable to other medical treatments, including relationship status and sexual orientation, appear to have the greatest impact on utilization. Countries with the most generous public financing schemes tend to restrict access to covered IVF to a greater degree. However, no link could be established between IVF utilization and the manner in which coverage was regulated or the level of public financing. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Owing to the lack of data regarding the actual level of public versus private financing of IVF it is impossible to draw conclusions regarding equity of access. Moreover, the regulatory and utilization data were not completely temporally matched in what can be a quickly changing regulatory landscape. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Whether motivated by cost, eligility restrictions or the availability of particular services, cross-border treatment seeking is driven by regulatory policies, underscoring the extra-territorial implications of in-country political decisions regarding access to IVF. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): There was no funding source for this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.