No abstract

Summary:Purpose: To determine the direct costs of epilepsy in a child neurology referral population, stratified by disease, duration, and severity, comparing three different health care settings [i.e., teaching or clinical research (CR) hospitals, general hospitals, and outpatient services].Methods: Patients were accepted if they had confirmed epilepsy and were resident in the center catchment area. Eligible subjects were grouped in the following categories: (a) newly diagnosed patients; (b) patients with epilepsy in remission; (c) patients with active non-drug-resistant epilepsy; and (d) those with drug-resistant epilepsy. Over a 12-month period, data regarding the consuming of all resources (i.e., consultations, tests, hospital admissions, drugs), were collected for each patient. Using the Italian National Health Service tariffs, the unit cost of each resource was calculated and indicated in Euros, the European currency.Results: A total of 189 patients was enrolled by two teaching-CR hospitals, two general hospitals, and two outpatient services. The patients were evenly distributed across the four categories of epilepsy. The mean annual cost per person with epilepsy was 1,767 Euros. Drug-resistant epilepsy was the most expensive category (3,268 Euros) followed by newly diagnosed epilepsy (1,907 Euros), active non-drug-resistant epilepsy (1,112 Euros), and epilepsy in remission (844 Euros).Costs were generally highest in teaching-CR hospitals and lowest in outpatient services. Hospital services were the major cost in all epilepsy groups, followed by drugs. Conclusions:The cost of epilepsy in children and adolescents in Italy tends to vary significantly depending on the severity and duration of the disease Hospitals services and drugs are the major sources of costs. The setting of health care plays a significant role in the variation of the costs, even for patients in the same category of epilepsy.

Psoriasis is a chronic, immune-mediated skin disorder that affects 1-3% of the general population worldwide. While considered a non-life-threatening disease, psoriasis represents a social and financial burden for patients and the healthcare system. Individuals suffer from disfigurement and from social stigmatization. Because the disease is usually persistent, patients with a diagnosis of psoriasis usually need lifelong care, which also means a lifetime of expenses. We aimed to conduct a comprehensive review of the evidence available concerning the social burden and costs of psoriasis. A search for the keywords 'quality of life' (QOL) or 'burden' or 'stigmatization' or 'psychological factors' in PubMed up to January 2010 yielded a total of 817 studies. QOL was affected by psoriasis to a degree comparable with diabetes or cancer. A search for 'cost-of-illness analyses', in the same period, yielded only seven papers satisfying entry criteria. All the studies but one were performed before biologics became available for psoriasis treatment. Direct costs were higher than indirect costs, with hospitalization representing the most significant item. Treatment costs showed wide variations between different studies. Reasons for these discrepancies are manifold including differences in the selection of the sample, as well as in the methods for calculating costs. There is a need to harmonize methodologies. For a final conclusive judgement of the cost effectiveness of innovative therapies such as biological agents, long-term economic consequences have to be evaluated and long-term remission rates and complications considered.

No abstract

No abstract

Our review confirmed that the BIA is not yet a well-established technique in the literature and many published studies still fail to reach an acceptable quality. In particular, BIAs funded by pharmaceutical companies appear to be tailored to show short-term savings induced by new, highly priced products.

No abstract

The review found a substantial share of studies supported by the pharmaceutical industry, almost all concluding in favor of the drug studied, without any unfavorable conclusions at all. These results confirm also in the field of pharmacoeconomic studies that the best way of limiting confounding factors is by clearly distinguishing assessors from manufacturers and marketers of any new technology.