Health economic evaluation of outpatient management of fibromyalgia patients and the costs avoided by diagnosing fibromyalgia in France.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether the decrease in medical resource use and cost after diagnosing fibromyalgia, observed in a large primary care population in the United Kingdom can be extrapolated to France. METHODS: A questionnaire was created based on medical resource use by 2,260 patients diagnosed with fibromyalgia between 01/01/1998 and 31/03/2003 in the General Practice Research Database in the UK. Sixty French experts (general practitioners, rheumatologists) assessed whether the data from that database are in line with their clinical practice and, if not, were asked to provide data reflecting their own experience. The evaluation period went from 4 years before to 4 years after diagnosis using 1-year cross-sections. Evaluated resources were drug use, diagnostics tests, general practitioners and specialist visits, and also paramedical or alternative treatments. Data regarding inpatient care and productivity loss were not collected. Medical resource use if no diagnosis had been established was estimated, so the impact of diagnosis could be evaluated. RESULTS: Whereas costs gradually increase before diagnosis, stagnation in costs occurs in the year after diagnosis, followed by a moderate decrease afterwards. The same trend was observed whether the panel consisted of general practitioners or rheumatologists. The savings made as a result of fibromyalgia diagnosis add up to 126 euros per patient per year for the health care payer. General practitioner visits, diagnostic tests and drug use represent respectively 57%, 23% and 12% of the savings. CONCLUSIONS: Also in France, early diagnosis of fibromyalgia leads to a decrease in resource use and health care costs.

Development of the Fibromyalgia Burden Assessment: measuring the multifaceted burden of fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a questionnaire assessing the burden of fibromyalgia's impacts on patients' lives. METHODS: A literature review was conducted to identify impacts of fibromyalgia and their consequences on patients' lives. Exploratory interviews were performed with 15 fibromyalgia patients in France, Germany and Spain. Using patients' wording, items were generated simultaneously in French, German, Spanish, and UK English. Relevance and comprehension of the resulting questionnaire versions were tested with 21 additional fibromyalgia patients; questionnaires were revised accordingly. RESULTS: Three domains, Burden associated with the impacts of fibromyalgia, Symptoms and Influencing factors, were identified from the literature review. Following patient interviews, the burden domain was further divided based on the nature of the impact: Pain, Physical impact (including tiredness, sleep problems and other symptoms), Activities of Daily Living impact (including autonomy and coping), Social and Family Life impact, Work, Studies and Personal Finances impact, Psychological impact (including cognitive impact), and Relationship to Medicine and Disease. The resulting test versions of the questionnaire contained 79 items. Comprehension tests identified problematic items and cultural differences and suggested deletions or rewording. After revision and linguistic harmonization, the pilot version of the questionnaire contained 62 items divided into 7 sections, and was named Fibromyalgia Burden Assessment (FMBA©). CONCLUSIONS: The FMBA is a self-reported questionnaire allowing the assessment and a better understanding of the impacts of fibromyalgia and the burden associated with these on patients' daily lives. It is available in UK English, French, German and Spanish. Its scoring and validation remain to be undertaken.

Health economic consequences related to the diagnosis of fibromyalgia syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use and costs of medical resources before and after a diagnosis of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) in a large primary care population in the UK. METHODS: We applied an existing data set for medical resource use among patients with a coded diagnosis of FMS. The observed quantities of 157 types of medical resource use before and after the diagnosis of FMS were multiplied by unit costs in order to calculate the cost of care (general practitioner [GP] visits, drugs, referrals, and diagnostics) within the National Health Service, excluding hospital costs. Costs before diagnosis were used in a trend analysis to predict later costs, assuming the diagnosis had never been made, and these predicted costs were compared with the observed costs after diagnosis. RESULTS: Following a diagnosis of FMS, a decrease in costs as compared with the predicted trend was observed. In the 4 years after diagnosis, the average difference between the predicted and observed cost was pound66.21 per 6 months per patient. This suggests that making the diagnosis leads to savings and a decrease in resource use. The main effect was observed for tests and imaging ( pound24.02 per 6 months), followed by pharmaceuticals ( pound22.27), referrals ( pound15.56), and GP visits ( pound4.36). CONCLUSION: Failure to diagnose a true case of FMS has its own costs, largely in excess GP visits, investigations, and prescriptions.

Comparative cost-minimisation of oral and intravenous chemotherapy for first-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer in the UK NHS system.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence recommends vinorelbine (VNB), paclitaxel, docetaxel, and gemcitabine in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. An economic model was prepared to determine the comparative cost of these agents, including the new oral formulation of VNB from a United Kingdom National Health System perspective. Clinical effectiveness was determined from published trials. Costs of drug acquisition, administration, toxicity management, and patient transportation costs were calculated from reference publications. A Markov model was used to estimate the cost per patient over 52 weeks. Intravenous VNB, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, and docetaxel incur annual follow-up costs of 3,746 pounds, 5,332 pounds, 5,977 pounds, and 6,766 pounds, respectively, while oral VNB with outpatient administration on d1, and self-administration at home on d8 every 21 days has a cost per patient per year of 2,888 pounds. Oral VNB allows further hospital resources savings.

Estimating the cost-effectiveness of stroke units in France compared with conventional care.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The incidence of stroke in France is estimated at between 120 000 and 150 000 cases per year. This modeling study assessed the clinical and economic benefits of establishing specialized stroke units compared with conventional care. METHODS: Data from the Dijon stroke registry were used to determine healthcare trajectories according to the degree of autonomy and organization of patient care. The relative risks of death or institutionalization or death or dependence after passage through a stroke unit were compared with conventional care. These risks were then inserted with the costing data into a Markov model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of stroke units. RESULTS: Patients cared for in a stroke unit survive more trimesters without sequelae in the 5 years after hospitalization than those cared for conventionally (11.6 versus 8.28 trimesters). The mean cost per patient at 5 years was estimated at 30 983 for conventional care and 34 638 in a stroke unit. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for stroke units of 1359 per year of life gained without disability was estimated. CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effectiveness ratio for stroke units is much lower than the threshold (53 400 ) of acceptability recognized by the international scientific community. This finding justifies organizational changes in the management of stroke patients and the establishment of stroke units in France.

Internet pharmaco-economic studies in metastatic colorectal cancer.

An interactive Web site has been developed: http://smbh7.smbh.univ-paris13.fr, which uses a Markov model to calculate the management costs for metastatic colorectal cancer. This site allows drug usage costs, daily tariff costs per site, local ISA point values and the cost to the society of the chemotherapies prescribed to be recorded by cycle in a de-centralised manner. The overall cost of treatment may be calculated by one of these four units from the time when the first chemotherapy was administered until the patient has escaped from first or second line treatment. The median time to progression and the median survival time are key parameters used to calculate costs as they determine the number of patients who remain on treatment, course by course. Effectiveness results have been measured in terms of progression free survival or of global survival. Eight treatment strategies have been examined. It is possible to add new treatment regimens or new compounds into the existing pre-formatted tables. This software enables budgets to be planned depending on the regimen used and the number of patients treated. It also allows the different treatment options to be classified with respect to their incremental cost effectiveness ratio, which is defined by the additional cost of one treatment option compared to another divided by the corresponding increase in effectiveness.