Epidemiology, healthcare resource utilization and healthcare costs for spinal muscular atrophy in Alberta, Canada.

AIMS: Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a progressive neuromuscular disease associated with the degeneration of motor neurons in the brainstem and spinal cord. Studies examining the epidemiology and economic impact of SMA are limited in Canada. This study aimed to estimate the epidemiology as well as healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and healthcare costs for children with SMA in Alberta, Canada. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study using anonymized data from administrative healthcare databases provided by Alberta Health. Data from 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2018, were extracted for patients <18 years of age identified with SMA. Five-year incidence and prevalence were calculated for cases identified between 1 April 2012 and 31 March 2017. HRU and healthcare costs were assessed one year after SMA diagnosis, including hospitalizations, physician visits, ambulatory care visits and long-term care admissions. RESULTS: The five-year incidence and prevalence of pediatric onset SMA were 1.03 per 100,000 person-years and 9.97 per 100,000 persons, respectively. General practitioner, specialist, and ambulatory care visits were common among children with SMA in the first-year post-diagnosis. The mean (SD) total annual direct cost per patient in the first-year post-diagnosis was $29,774 ($38,407); hospitalizations accounted for 41.7% of these costs ($12,412 [$21,170]), followed by practitioner visits at 32.3% ($9,615 [$13,054]), and ambulatory care visits at 26.0% ($7,746 [$9,988]). CONCLUSIONS: Children with SMA experience substantial HRU, particularly for hospitalizations and practitioner visits, following diagnosis. Given the high costs of SMA, timely access to effective treatment strategies, such as the novel survival motor neuron (SMN)-restoring treatments recently approved for use, are needed to improve health outcomes and HRU.

A comprehensive and practical approach to the management of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

Introduction: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a debilitating, progressive, and fatal fibrotic pulmonary disease with a prognosis comparable to that of lung cancer. IPF management is a complex process that involves pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions, extensive patient education, and addressing patient needs that change through the course of the illness. Areas covered: This review summarizes the key aspects of a multifaceted, multidisciplinary, individualized approach to IPF care that incorporates available treatment options, strategies to improve compliance with antifibrotic therapies, pulmonary rehabilitation, and the integration of palliative care for symptom management. Aspects of care discussed include the use of antifibrotic therapy and nonpharmacological treatments, targeted education and psychosocial support, evaluation and management of comorbidities, and early integration of palliative care. Expert opinion: By incorporating this comprehensive approach to disease management, physicians can address most aspects of care for a patient with IPF to optimize survival and quality of life.

A cross-sectional evaluation of the idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis patient satisfaction and quality of life with a care coordinator.

BACKGROUND: Canadian and international guidelines recommend specialized, multidisciplinary teams for the treatment of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). The objective of this cross-sectional clinical study was to investigate the effect of a care coordinator on IPF patient satisfaction and quality of life. METHODS: Forty IPF patients were enrolled from the practices of two physicians (n=20/physician), with either low (LCU) or high-coordinator use (HCU). Patient satisfaction was measured with modified FAMCARE and IPF Care UK Patient Support Program (UK-CARE) surveys. Health related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed with the living with IPF impacts (L-IPFi) survey. An economic model assessed the impact of the coordinator; staff surveys informed patient management requirements, and costs were derived from published literature. RESULTS: Patient satisfaction was similar between the clinics; a trend (P=0.1) towards increased satisfaction among HCU patients was observed. Patients in the HCU clinic reported increased satisfaction (P<0.05) with their current care compared with care prior to joining the tertiary-care clinic, while LCU patients did not. IPF patient HRQoL did not differ between clinics. The coordinator was estimated to alleviate approximately 30% of a physician's IPF-related work load, and to facilitate the care of more patients per physician. Modelled estimates suggest the coordinator lead to annual cost-savings of $137,212. CONCLUSIONS: Reliance upon a coordinator during routine management of IPF patients may improve patient satisfaction, spare physician time and lead to annual cost-savings. Future studies should examine the impact of a coordinator on healthcare resource utilization.