Increased healthcare utilization costs following initiation of insulin treatment in type 2 diabetes: A long-term follow-up in clinical practice.

AIMS: To compare long-term changes in healthcare utilization and costs for type 2 diabetes patients before and after insulin initiation, as well as healthcare costs after insulin versus non-insulin anti-diabetic (NIAD) initiation. METHODS: Patients newly initiated on insulin (n=2823) were identified in primary health care records from 84 Swedish primary care centers, between 1999 to 2009. First, healthcare costs per patient were evaluated for primary care, hospitalizations and secondary outpatient care, before and up to seven years after insulin initiation. Second, patients prescribed insulin in second line were matched to patients prescribed NIAD in second line, and the healthcare costs of the matched groups were compared. RESULTS: The total mean annual healthcare cost increased from €1656 per patient 2 years before insulin initiation to €3814 seven years after insulin initiation. The total cumulative mean healthcare cost per patient at year 5 after second-line treatment was €13,823 in the insulin group compared to €9989 in the NIAD group. CONCLUSIONS: Initiation of insulin in type 2 diabetes patients was followed by increased healthcare costs. The increases in costs were larger than those seen in a matched patient population initiated on NIAD treatment in second-line.

Differences between hypothetical and experience-based value sets for EQ-5D used in Sweden: Implications for decision makers.

AIMS: A number of value sets are available today for converting EQ-5D questionnaire responses to quality-adjusted life year-weights used in health economic evaluations. The aim of this study is to analyse the differences between the commonly used hypothetical UK value set and the newly introduced Swedish experience-based value set and to evaluate health economic implications of such differences on policy decisions. METHODS: Differences between the two value sets were studied using two methods: a comparison of health states and improvements as well as an empirical comparison. In the comparison of health states and improvements, the valuations of all EQ-5D states and all pure improvements were compared. In the empirical study, a database of 23,925 individuals was used to identify patient groups that could be affected by the implementation of the Swedish experience-based value set. RESULTS: The comparison of health states and possible improvements showed that only three health states were assigned a lower quality-adjusted life year-weight and most improvements were given smaller absolute values if the experience-based value set was used. The empirical comparison showed that severe conditions were assigned higher values when using the experience-based value set. CONCLUSIONS: The Swedish experience-based value set seems to render a higher estimated level of health-related quality of life in virtually all health conditions compared to the hypothetical UK value set. In extension, health-related quality of life enhancing interventions are likely to be given higher priority in decision-making situations where hypothetical values are used to construct quality-adjusted life year-weights. In situations where experience-based quality-adjusted life year-weights are used, life-prolonging interventions would be prioritised.

Physician Preferences and Variations in Prescription of Biologic Drugs for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Register-Based Study of 4,010 Patients in Sweden.

OBJECTIVE: The prescription of biologic drugs for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients has varied considerably across different regions. Previous studies have shown physician preferences to be an important determinant in the decision to select biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) rather than nonbiologic, synthetic DMARDs (sDMARDs) alone. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that physician preferences are an important determinant for prescribing bDMARDs for RA patients in Sweden. METHODS: Using data from the Swedish Rheumatology Quality Register, we identified 4,010 RA patients who were not prescribed bDMARDs during the period 2008-2012, but who, on at least 1 occasion, had an sDMARD prescription and changed treatment for the first time to either a new sDMARD or a bDMARD. Physician preference for the use of bDMARDs was calculated using data on each physician's prescriptions during the study period. The relationship between prescription of a bDMARD and physician preference, controlling for patient characteristics, disease activity, and the physician's local context was evaluated using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: When adjusting for patient characteristics, disease activity, and the physician's local context, physician preference was an important predictor for prescription of bDMARDs. Compared with patients of a physician in the lowest preference tertile, patients of physicians in the highest and middle tertiles had an odds ratio for receiving bDMARDs of 2.8 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 2.13-3.68) and 1.28 (95% CI 1.05-1.57), respectively. CONCLUSION: Physician preference is an important determinant for prescribing bDMARDs.

Factors influencing rheumatologists' prescription of biological treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: an interview study.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of biological drugs involved a fundamental change in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The extent to which biological drugs are prescribed to RA patients in different regions in Sweden varies greatly. Previous research has indicated that differences in health care practice at the regional level might obscure differences at the individual level. The objective of this study is to explore what influences individual rheumatologists' decisions when prescribing biological drugs. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews, utilizing closed- and open-ended questions, were conducted with senior rheumatologists, selected through a mix of random and purposive sampling. The interview questions consisted of two parts, with a "parallel mixed method" approach. In the first and main part, open-ended exploratory questions were posed about factors influencing prescription. In the second part, the rheumatologists were asked to rate predefined factors that might influence their prescription decisions. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used as a conceptual framework for data collection and analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-six rheumatologists were interviewed. A constellation of various factors and their interaction influenced rheumatologists' prescribing decisions, including the individual rheumatologist's experiences and perceptions of the evidence, the structure of the department including responsibility for costs, peer pressure, political and administrative influences, and participation in clinical trials. The patient as an actor emerged as an important factor. Hence, factors both at organizational and individual levels influenced the prescribing of biological drugs. The factors should not be seen as individual influences but were described as influencing prescription in an interactive, nonlinear way. CONCLUSIONS: Potential factors explaining differences in prescription practice are experience and perception of the evidence on the individual level and the structure of the department and participation in clinical trials on the organizational level. The influence of patient attitudes and preferences and interpretation of scientific evidence seemed to be somewhat contradictory in the qualitative responses as compared to the quantitative rating, and this needs further exploration. An implication of the present study is that in addition to scientific knowledge, attempts to influence prescription behavior need to be multifactorial and account for interactions of factors between different actors.

Costs of rheumatoid arthritis during the period 1990-2010: a register-based cost-of-illness study in Sweden.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to analyse the total socio-economic impact of RA in Sweden during the period 1990-2010 and to analyse possible changes in costs during this period. The period was deliberately chosen to cover 10 years before and 10 years after the introduction of biologic drugs. METHODS: A prevalence-based cost-of-illness study was conducted based on data from national and regional registries. RESULTS: There was a decrease in the utilization of RA-related inpatient care as well as sick leave and disability pension during 1990-2010 in Sweden. Total costs for RA are presented in current prices as well as inflation-adjusted with the consumer price index (CPI) and a healthcare price index. The total fixed cost of RA was €454 million in 1990, adjusted to the price level of 2010 with the CPI. This cost increased to €600 million in 2010 and the increase was mainly due to the substantially increasing costs for pharmaceuticals. Of the total costs, drug costs increased from 3% to 33% between 1990 and 2010. Consequently the portion of total costs accounting for indirect costs for RA is lowered from 75% in 1990 to 58% in 2010. CONCLUSION: By inflation adjusting with the CPI, which is reasonable from a societal perspective, there was a 32% increase in the total fixed cost of RA between 1990 and 2010. This suggests that decreased hospitalization and indirect costs have not fallen enough to offset the increasing cost of drug treatment.