Cost database

Abstract: Background Depression is one of the most disabling diseases, and causes a significant burden both to the individual and to society. WHO data suggests that depression causes 6% of the burden of all diseases in Europe in terms of disability adjusted life years (DALYs). Yet, the knowledge of the economic impact of depression has been relatively little researched in Europe. Aims of the study The present study aims at estimating the total cost of depression in Europe based on published epidemiologic and economic evidence. Methods A model was developed to combine epidemiological and economic data on depression in Europe to estimate the cost. The model was populated with data collected from extensive literature reviews of the epidemiology and economic burden of depression in Europe. The cost data was calculated as annual cost per patient, and epidemiologic data was reported as 12-month prevalence estimates. National and international statistics for the model were retrieved from the OECD and Eurostat databases. The aggregated annual cost estimates were presented in Euro for 2004. Results In 28 countries with a population of 466 million, at least 21 million were affected by depression. The total annual cost of depression in Europe was estimated at Euro 118 billion in 2004, which corresponds to a cost of Euro 253 per inhabitant. Direct costs alone totalled dollar 42 billion, comprised of outpatient care (Euro 22 billion), drug cost (Euro 9 billion) and hospitalization (Euro 10 billion). Indirect costs due to morbidity and mortality were estimated at Euro 76 billion. This makes depression the most costly brain disorder in Europe, accounting for 33% of the total cost. The cost of depression corresponds to 1% of the total economy of Europe (GDP). Discussion Our cost results are in good agreement with previous research findings. The cost estimates in the present study are based on model simulations for countries where no data was available. The predictability of our model is limited to the accuracy of the input data employed. As there is no earlier cost-of-illness study conducted on depression in Europe, it is, however, difficult to evaluate the validity of our results for individual countries and thus further research is needed. Conclusion The cost of depression poses a significant economic burden to European society. The simulation model employed shows good predictability of the cost of depression in Europe and is a novel approach to estimate the cost-of-illness in Europe. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND POLICIES: Health and social care policy and commissioning must be evidence-based. The empirical results from this study confirm previous findings, that depression is a major concern to the economic welfare in Europe which has consequences to both healthcare providers and policy makers. One important way to stop this explosion in cost is through increased research efforts in the field. Moreover, better detection, prevention, treatment and patient management are imperatives to reduce the burden of depression and its costs. Mental healthcare policies and better access to healthcare for mentally ill are other challenges to improve for Europe. Implications for further research This study has identified several research gaps which are of interest for future research. In order to better understand the impact of depression to European society long-term prospective epidemiology and cost-of-illness studies are needed. In particular data is lacking for Central European countries. On the basis of our findings, further economic evaluations of treatments for depression are necessary in order to ensure a cost-effective use of European healthcare budgets.

Abstract: Objectives: To systematically review cost benefit studies of telemedicine. Design: Systematic review of English language, peer reviewed journal articles. Data sources: Searches of Medline, Embase, ISI citation indexes, and database of Telemedicine Information Exchange. Studies selected: 55 of 612 identified articles that presented actual cost benefit data. Main outcome measures: Scientific quality of reports assessed by use of an established instrument for adjudicating on the quality of economic analyses. Results: 557 articles without cost data categorised by topic. 55 articles with data initially categorised by cost variables employed in the study and conclusions. Only 24/55 (44%) studies met quality criteria justifying inclusion in a quality review. 20/24 (83%) restricted to simple cost comparisons. No study used cost utility analysis, the conventional means of establishing the “value for money” that a therapeutic intervention represents. Only 7/24 (29%) studies attempted to explore the level of utilisation that would be needed for telemedicine services to compare favourably with traditionally organised health care. None addressed this question in sufficient detail to adequately answer it. 15/24 (62.5%) of articles reviewed here provided no details of sensitivity analysis, a method all economic analyses should incorporate. Conclusion: There is no good evidence that telemedicine is a cost effective means of delivering health care.

Abstract: When do oligopolists gain by sharing their private information about their costs with one another? What are the social welfare effects of such information exchange? I study these questions by comparing the oligopolists' expected profits under a cost sharing agreement with their expected profits in the Bayesian equilibrium that would arise without cost sharing. I also analyse the firms' decisions to form a trade association to share their cost data. Under conditions of linear demand and Cournot behaviour, industrywide information exchange is the unique point in the core of the trade association membership game. The exchange of cost data increases expected profits and welfare, but reduces expected consumer surplus. Cost sharing increases efficiency by raising the market shares of lower cost firms and reducing the variability of aggregate output. Consumer surplus is diminished, however, because the variance of output is reduced, and consumer surplus is a convex function of output.

Abstract: The evidence on the economic burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs) remains scarce. We conducted a comprehensive systematic review to establish the magnitude and knowledge gaps in relation to the economic burden of CVD and hypertension on households, health systems and the society. We included studies using primary or secondary data to produce original economic estimates of the impact of CVD. We searched sixteen electronic databases from 1990 onwards without language restrictions. We appraised the quality of included studies using a seven-question assessment tool. Eighty-three studies met the inclusion criteria, most of which were single centre retrospective cost studies conducted in secondary care settings. Studies in China, Brazil, India and Mexico contributed together 50% of the total number of economic estimates identified. The quality of the included studies was generally low. Reporting transparency, particularly for cost data sources and results, was poor. The costs per episode for hypertension and generic CVD were fairly homogeneous across studies; ranging between $500 and $1500. In contrast, for coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke cost estimates were generally higher and more heterogeneous, with several estimates in excess of $5000 per episode. The economic perspective and scope of the study appeared to impact cost estimates for hypertension and generic CVD considerably less than estimates for stroke and CHD. Most studies reported monthly costs for hypertension treatment around $22. Average monthly treatment costs for stroke and CHD ranged between $300 and $1000, however variability across estimates was high. In most LMICs both the annual cost of care and the cost of an acute episode exceed many times the total health expenditure per capita. The existing evidence on the economic burden of CVD in LMICs does not appear aligned with policy priorities in terms of research volume, pathologies studied and methodological quality. Not only is more economic research needed to fill the existing gaps, but research quality needs to be drastically improved. More broadly, national-level studies with appropriate sample sizes and adequate incorporation of indirect costs need to replace small-scale, institutional, retrospective cost studies.