Trends in prevalence, mortality, health care utilization and health care costs of Swiss IBD patients: a claims data based study of the years 2010, 2012 and 2014

Abstract

BackgroundReal-life data on inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) prevalence and costs are scarce. The aims of this study were to provide an overview of the prevalence, mortality, health care utilization and costs of IBD patients in Switzerland in the years 2010, 2012, and 2014.MethodsBased on claims data of the Helsana-Group, prevalence of IBD was assessed for 2010, 2012 and 2014. Mortality rates, costs (inpatient, outpatient, medication costs) and utilization (visits, hospitalizations) were compared between patients with and without IBD, and between IBD patients treated with and without biologics. Results were extrapolated to the Swiss general population using national census data. Multivariate linear regression was used to identify socio-demographic and regional factors influencing total costs.ResultsThe overall extrapolated prevalence rates of IBD were 0.32% in 2010, 0.38% in 2012, and 0.41% in 2014. Mortality rate didn’t differ between the IBD and non-IBD population. Costs increased annually by 6% in IBD versus 2.4% in non-IBD subjects, which was solely due to increased outpatient costs. Almost one-fourth of IBD patients were hospitalized at least once a year. Costs were higher in IBD patients treated with biologics (OR = 3.98, CI: 3.72-4.27, p < 0.001) when compared to IBD patients without biologic therapies. Over 70% of the total costs in IBD patients treated with biologics were due to drug costs, compared with 28% in patients without use of biologic therapies, whereas inpatient costs didn’t differ.ConclusionsThe prevalence of IBD seems to be increasing in Switzerland. Outpatient costs increased substantially, while no decrease in inpatient costs was found. Treatment of IBD is more and more based on biologic therapies.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12876-017-0681-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Real-world biologic treatment and associated cost in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

“…We observed that 8.22 % of all IBD patients received a therapy with a biologic agent. This number is much smaller than in previous studies addressing countries other than Germany, such as France (12 %) [14], Switzerland (12.8 %) [15], or the United States (11 %) [16], but it is in line with previous German studies (UC: 2.5 -3.2 %; CD: 8.2 -8.4 %) [17,18]. We cannot evaluate whether our identified low biologics quota documents an under-treatment of IBD patients with these agents, as neither the disease activity was coded in our claims data nor systemic CS prescriptions in patients not receiving biologics were assessed.…”

Asthma Induction During Development and Adult Lung Function, Behavior and Brain Gene Expression

“…Allergic asthma affects 9.5% of children and adolescents in the United States (Akinbami et al, 2012). People with asthma can develop comorbidities with other atopic disorders and other health outcomes (Guerra et al, 2004; Lødrup Carlsen et al, 2014).…”

Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Early Compared with Late or No Biologic Treatment to Manage Crohn’s Disease using Real-World Data

“…In brief, unit costs for IBD-related inpatient and outpatient events recorded in the SIBDCS were estimated from reimbursement claims data obtained from the Helsana Group (see Supplementary Files Table S8 for a full list of procedures considered). This is a leading health insurance company in Switzerland providing statutory health insurance to 15% of the population 4 . Costs estimated from this dataset are based on national reimbursement tariffs, which are standardised across Switzerland (TARMED 28 in the outpatient sector and Swiss diagnosis-related groups 29 in the inpatient sector) and adjust for regional variations in costs.…”

“…In Switzerland, uptake of novel biologic treatments was associated with a marked increase in health care expenditures placing significant financial pressure on the health system 3 . The changing treatment landscape and a rising prevalence 4 mark an important opportunity to identify clinically-and cost-efficient treatment strategies.…”