Search

Objectives: Osteoarthritis (OA) and chronic low back pain (CLBP) are common musculoskeletal disorders with substantial patient and societal burden. Nordic administrative registers offer a unique opportunity to study the impact of these conditions in the real-world setting. The Burden of Disease and Management of Osteoarthritis and Chronic Low Back Pain: Health Care Utilization and Sick Leave in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark (BISCUITS) study was designed to study disease prevalence and the societal and economic burden in broad OA and CLBP populations. Methods: Patients in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark with diagnoses of OA or CLBP (low back pain record plus >= 2 pain relief prescriptions to indicate chronicity) were identified in specialty care, in primary care (Sweden and Finland) and in a quality-of-care register (Sweden). Matched controls were identified for the specialty care cohort. Longitudinal data were extracted on prevalence, treatment patterns, patient-reported outcomes, social and economic burden. Results: Almost 1.4 million patients with OA and 0.4 million with CLBP were identified in specialty care, corresponding to a prevalence in the Nordic countries of 6.3 and 1.9%, respectively. The prevalence increased to 11-14% for OA and almost 6% for CLBP when adding patients identified in primary care. OA patients had a higher Elixhauser comorbidity index (0.66 vs. 0.46) and were using opioids (44.7 vs. 10.2%) or long-term nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAIDs) (20.9 vs. 4.5%) more than four times as often as compared to controls. The differences were even larger for CLBP patients compared to their controls (comorbidity index 0.89 vs. 0.39, opioid use 77.7 vs. 9.4%, and long-term NSAID use 37.2 vs. 4.8%). Conclusions: The BISCUITS study offers an unprecedented, longitudinal healthcare data source to quantify the real-world burden of more than 1.8 million patients with OA or CLBP across four countries. In subsequent papers we aim to explore am

Patricia Schepman,1 Sheena Thakkar,1 Rebecca Robinson,2 Deepa Malhotra,1 Birol Emir,1 Craig Beck1 1Pfizer Inc., New York, NY, USA; 2Eli Lilly and Company, New York, NY, USACorrespondence: Sheena ThakkarPfizer Inc., 235 East 42nd Street, New York, NY, 10017, USATel +1 347 961-9174Email sheena.thakkar@pfizer.comPurpose: Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common causes of chronic pain and a leading cause of disability in the US. The objective of this study was to examine the clinical and economic burden of OA by pain severity.Patients and Methods: We used nationally representative survey data. Adults ≥ 18 years with self-reported physician-diagnosed OA and experiencing OA pain were included in the study. OA pain severity was measured using the Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire Visual Analog Scale (SF-MPQ-VAS). Data were collected for demographics, clinical characteristics, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), productivity, OA treatment, adherence to pain medication, and healthcare resource utilization. Univariate analysis was performed to examine differences between respondents with moderate-to-severe OA pain vs those with mild OA pain.Results: Higher proportions of respondents with moderate-to-severe OA pain (n=3798) compared with mild OA pain (n=2038) were female (69.4% vs 57.3%), < 65 years of age (54.8% vs 43.4%), and not employed (70.6% vs 64.5%). Respondents with moderate-to-severe OA pain experienced OA pain daily (80.8% vs 48.8%), were obese (53.0% vs 40.5%), had more comorbidities (sleep disturbance, insomnia, depression, and anxiety), and reported significantly poorer health status and HRQoL, and greater productivity and activity impairment (all P< 0.05). Moderate-to-severe OA pain respondents were prescribed significantly more pain medications than mild OA pain respondents (41.0% vs 17.0%) and had higher adherence (75.9% vs 64.1%) yet were less satisfied with their pain medications (all P< 0.001). Outpatient and emergency room visits, an

Viktor V Chirikov,1 Chris Walker,2 Jennifer M Stephens,1 Patricia Schepman,3 Richard Chambers,4 Mahmoud Bakir,5 Gregory W Poorman,1 Seema Haider,6 Mohammed Farghaly7 1OPEN Health, Bethesda, MD, USA; 2Global Medical Affairs, Viatris, Tadworth, UK; 3Global Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Pfizer Inc, New York, NY, USA; 4Biostatistics, Pfizer Inc, Collegeville, PA, USA; 5Upjohn Export B.V., Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; 6Pfizer Inc., Groton, CT, USA; 7Dubai Medical College, Dubai, United Arab EmiratesCorrespondence: Jennifer M StephensOPEN Health, Bethesda, MD, USATel +1 703 625 5943Email jstephens@pharmerit.comObjective: Data on osteoarthritis patients from the PRECISION trial were used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of celecoxib (100 mg twice daily) versus ibuprofen (600– 800 mg three times daily) and naproxen (375– 500 mg twice daily). The perspective was that of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) healthcare system.Methods: Discrete-state Markov model with monthly cycles, 30-month horizon, and 3% discount rate was constructed to assess incremental costs per quality adjusted life year (QALYs) gained from reduced incidence of three safety domains examined in PRECISION: renal, serious gastrointestinal (GI), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Costs for managing these toxicities were derived from Dubai Administrative Billing Claims (2018). Median monthly drug costs were derived from UAE Ministry of Health and Prevention’s published prices ($26.98 celecoxib; $20.25 ibuprofen; $20.50 naproxen). Health utility and excess mortality associated with toxicities were sourced from the literature. The willingness-to-pay thresholds used were 1 and 3 GDP per capita ($40,000–$120,000).Results: The total average cost per patient was $812.88 for celecoxib, $775.26 for ibuprofen, and $731.17 for naproxen while cost components attributed to toxicities were lowest with celecoxib ($360.26, $438.31, and $388.60, respectively). Patients on