2009
DOI: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2009.01981.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The economic impact of severe asthma to low‐income families

Abstract: Family costs of severe asthma consumed over one-fourth of the family income of the underprivileged population in a middle-income country. Adequate management brings major economic benefit to individuals and families.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
48
0
5

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(54 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
1
48
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Patients had on average five fewer days of hospitalization a year and 68 fewer emergency or nonscheduled medical visits per year. The costs for asthma care were reduced on average by US$ 733 per patient/year to the families and by US$ 387 to the public health system (32).…”
mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Patients had on average five fewer days of hospitalization a year and 68 fewer emergency or nonscheduled medical visits per year. The costs for asthma care were reduced on average by US$ 733 per patient/year to the families and by US$ 387 to the public health system (32).…”
mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Lack of control of asthma is associated with avoidable reliance and expenditure on emergency care by underprivileged families and health systems that can hardly afford it [30]. Simple interventions for management of asthma can control the disease, and reduce mortality, hospital admissions and costs [30][31][32][33][34], but they are not yet integrated to primary care policies or widely available. A crucial move towards feasibility and sustainability in LMICs would be the full integration of asthma management into primary healthcare routines, as reported in South Africa [35].…”
Section: Inaction Is Not An Optionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In these settings, in general, the GINA strategy may be followed for asthma management at the individual level (Box 3-3), as it offers options for low cost diagnostic procedures, and therapeutic interventions which have been shown to be effective and reduce costs among the underserved. 281,282 In dealing with asthma control at the population level (Box 3-3), it is critical to prioritize the most cost-effective approach to asthma treatment in primary health care, which includes the use of ICS and SABA; 283 these are listed as essential medications by the World Health Organization. For diagnosis of asthma and monitoring of treatment response, the World Health Organization also lists PEF meters as essential tools in the Package of Essential Non-communicable Diseases Interventions, 49 with pulse oximeters also recommended when resources permit, for assessment of severity of acute asthma.…”
Section: Settings With Limited Resourcesmentioning
confidence: 99%