Economic and Humanistic Burden of Osteoarthritis: An Updated Systematic Review of Large Sample Studies.

OBJECTIVE: A previous systematic literature review demonstrated a significant economic and humanistic burden on patients with osteoarthritis (OA). The aim of this study was to systematically review and update the burden of OA reported by large sample studies since 2016. METHODS: We searched Medline (via Ovid) and Embase using the updated search strategy based on the previous review. Those studies with a sample size ≥ 1000 and measuring the cost (direct or indirect) or health-related quality of life (HRQL) of OA were included. Pairs of reviewers worked independently and in duplicate. An arbitrator was consulted to resolve discrepancies between reviewers. The Kappa value was calculated to examine the agreement between reviewers. All costs were converted to 2021 US dollars according to inflation rates and exchange rates. RESULTS: A total of 1230 studies were screened by title and abstract and 159 by full text, and 54 studies were included in the review. The Kappa value for the full-text screening was 0.71. Total annual OA-related direct costs ranged from US$326 in Japan to US$19,530 in the US. Total annual all-cause direct costs varied from US$173 in Italy to US$41,433 in the US. The annual indirect costs ranged from US$736 in the US to US$18,884 in the Netherlands. Thirty-four studies reported HRQL, with EQ-5D (13, 38%) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) (6, 18%) being the most frequently used instruments. The EQ-VAS and utility scores ranged from 41.5 to 81.7 and 0.3 to 0.9, respectively. The ranges of WOMAC pain (range 0-20, higher score for worse health), stiffness (range 0-8), and physical functioning (range 0-68) were 2.0-3.0, 1.0-5.0, and 5.8-42.8, respectively. CONCLUSION: Since 2016, the ranges of direct costs of OA became wider, while the HRQL of patients remained poor. More countries outside the US have published OA-related disease burden using registry databases.

Economic Evaluation of Sucrose Octasulfate Dressing for Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcers in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with noninfected neuroischemic diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) treated with sucrose octasulfate (SOS) dressing have been shown to have improved healing compared with patients wearing a similar type of dressing without SOS. In this study, we aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of SOS dressing compared with conventional dressings from a Canadian public payer's perspective. METHODS: We built a Markov model in a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 inpatients with type 2 diabetes with DFUs. The time horizon was 5 years, and the cycle length was 3 months. We incorporated effectiveness data from the Explorer trial and cohort studies, cost data (2020 Canadian dollars) from published Canadian studies and administrative databases, and utility parameters from the Alberta's Caring for Diabetes cohort. We used probabilistic analysis to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of SOS dressing compared with conventional dressings. RESULTS: In the comparison with conventional dressings, use of SOS dressing resulted in an expected increase of 0.16 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and an expected $5,878 decrease in health-care costs over 5 years. Adding SOS dressing resulted in a cost savings of $37,061 for every QALY gained. The probability that adding SOS dressing is cost-saving and cost-effective compared with conventional dressings was 89% and 86%, respectively, at a $50,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. CONCLUSIONS: SOS dressing accelerates ulcer healing and helps reduce the spending induced by persistent ulcer management and amputation. Therefore, SOS dressing is likely to be cost-effective and cost-saving, which is consistent with previous health technology assessments in other health-care systems.

Rural population's preferences matter: a value set for the EQ-5D-3L health states for China's rural population.

PURPOSE: To develop an EQ-5D-3L social value set based on Chinese rural population's preferences using the time trade-off (TTO) method, and to compare the differences in preferences on health states between China urban and rural population. METHODS: Between Sep 2013 and Nov 2013, a total of 1201 participants were recruited from rural areas of five Chinese cities (Beijing, Chengdu, Guiyang, Nanjing, and Shenyang) using a quota sampling method. Each respondent valued 13 health states using the TTO, and a total of 97 EQ-5D-3L health states were directly valued for estimating the value set. Various models with different specifications were explored at both aggregate and individual levels. The final model was determined by a set of predefined selection criteria. FINDINGS: An ordinary least square model at the aggregate level included 10 dummy variables for specifying the level 2 and 3 for each dimension and an N3 term presenting any dimension on level 3 was selected as the final model. The final model provides a value set ranges from - 0.218 to 0.859. The predicted utility values were highly correlated with but consistently lower than that of the published Chinese EQ-5D-3L value set (for urban population). CONCLUSION: The availability of the China rural value set provides a set of social preferences weights for researchers and policy decision-makers for use in China rural area.

Mapping the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-Revised: Renal to the EQ-5D-5L in patients with chronic kidney disease.

PURPOSE: The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-Revised: Renal (ESAS-r: Renal) is a disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that assesses symptoms common in chronic kidney disease (CKD). There is no preference-based scoring system for the ESAS-r: Renal or a mapping algorithm to predict health utility values. We aimed to develop a mapping algorithm from the ESAS-r: Renal to the Canadian EQ-5D-5L index scores. METHODS: We used data from a multi-centre cluster randomized-controlled trial of the routine measurement and reporting of PROMs in hemodialysis units in Northern Alberta, Canada. In two arms of the trial, both the ESAS-r: Renal and the EQ-5D-5L were administered to CKD patients undergoing hemodialysis. We used data from one arm for model estimation, and data from the other for validation. We explored direct and indirect mapping models; model selection was based on statistical fit and predictive power. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 506 patient records in the estimation sample and 242 in the validation sample. All models tended to perform better in patients with good health, and worse in those with poor health. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) and generalized linear model (GLM) on selected ESAS-r: Renal items were selected as final models as they fitted the best in estimation and validation sample. CONCLUSION: When only ESAS-r: Renal data are available, one could use GEE and GLM to predict EQ-5D-5L index scores for use in economic evaluation. External validation on populations with different characteristics is warranted, especially where renal-specific symptoms are more prevalent.

Estimating an EQ-5D-5L Value Set for China.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate a five-level EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) value set for China using the health preferences of residents living in the urban areas of the country. METHODS: The values of a subset of the EQ-5D-5L-defined health states (n = 86) were elicited using the time trade-off (TTO) technique from a sample of urban residents (n = 1271) recruited from five Chinese cities. In computer-assisted personal interviews, participants each completed 10 TTO tasks. Two additive and two multiplicative regression models were evaluated for their performance in describing the relationship between TTO values and health state characteristics using a cross-validation approach. Final values were generated using the best-performed model and a rescaling method. RESULTS: The 8- and 9-parameter multiplicative models unanimously outperformed the 20-parameter additive model using a random or fixed intercept in predicting values for out-of-sample health states in the cross-validation analysis and their coefficients were estimated with lower standard errors. The prediction accuracies of the two multiplicative models measured by the mean absolute error and the intraclass correlation coefficient were very similar, thus favoring the more parsimonious model. CONCLUSIONS: The 8-parameter multiplicative model performed the best in the study and therefore was used to generate the EQ-5D-5L value set for China. We recommend using rescaled values whereby 1 represents the value of instrument-defined full health in economic evaluation of health technologies in China whenever the EQ-5D-5L data are available.

Economic and Humanistic Burden of Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review of Large Sample Studies.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) consumes a significant amount of healthcare resources, and impairs the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients. Previous reviews have consistently found substantial variations in the costs of OA across studies and countries. The comparability between studies was poor and limited the detection of the true differences between these studies. OBJECTIVE: To review large sample studies on measuring the economic and/or humanistic burden of OA published since May 2006. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases using comprehensive search strategies to identify studies reporting economic burden and HRQoL of OA. We included large sample studies if they had a sample size ≥1000 and measured the cost and/or HRQoL of OA. Reviewers worked independently and in duplicate, performing a cross-check between groups to verify agreement. Within- and between-group consolidation was performed to resolve discrepancies, with outstanding discrepancies being resolved by an arbitrator. The Kappa statistic was reported to assess the agreement between the reviewers. All costs were adjusted in their original currency to year 2015 using published inflation rates for the country where the study was conducted, and then converted to 2015 US dollars. RESULTS: A total of 651 articles were screened by title and abstract, 94 were reviewed in full text, and 28 were included in the final review. The Kappa value was 0.794. Twenty studies reported direct costs and nine reported indirect costs. The total annual average direct costs varied from US$1442 to US$21,335, both in USA. The annual average indirect costs ranged from US$238 to US$29,935. Twelve studies measured HRQoL using various instruments. The Short Form 12 version 2 scores ranged from 35.0 to 51.3 for the physical component, and from 43.5 to 55.0 for the mental component. Health utilities varied from 0.30 for severe OA to 0.77 for mild OA. CONCLUSION: Per-patient OA costs are considerable and a patient's quality of life remains poor. Variations in costing methods are a barrier to understanding the true differences in the costs of OA between studies. Standardizing healthcare resource items, the definition of OA-relevant costs, and productivity loss measures would facilitate the comparison.