Search

Objective: This study was undertaken to calculate epilepsy-related direct, indirect, and total costs in adult patients with active epilepsy (ongoing unprovoked seizures) in Germany and to analyze cost components and dynamics compared to previous studies from 2003, 2008, and 2013. This analysis was part of the Epi2020 study., Methods: Direct and indirect costs related to epilepsy were calculated with a multicenter survey using an established and validated questionnaire with a bottom-up design and human capital approach over a 3-month period in late 2020. Epilepsy-specific costs in the German health care sector from 2003, 2008, and 2013 were corrected for inflation to allow for a valid comparison., Results: Data on the disease-specific costs for 253 patients in 2020 were analyzed. The mean total costs were calculated at €5551 (±€5805, median = €2611, range = €274-€21 667) per 3 months, comprising mean direct costs of €1861 (±€1905, median = €1276, range = €327-€13 158) and mean indirect costs of €3690 (±€5298, median = €0, range = €0-€11 925). The main direct cost components were hospitalization (42.4%), antiseizure medication (42.2%), and outpatient care (6.2%). Productivity losses due to early retirement (53.6%), part-time work or unemployment (30.8%), and seizure-related off-days (15.6%) were the main reasons for indirect costs. However, compared to 2013, there was no significant increase of direct costs (-10.0%), and indirect costs significantly increased (p < .028, +35.1%), resulting in a significant increase in total epilepsy-related costs (p < .047, +20.2%). Compared to the 2013 study population, a significant increase of cost of illness could be observed (p = .047)., Significance: The present study shows that disease-related costs in adult patients with active epilepsy increased from 2013 to 2020. As direct costs have remained constant, this increase is attributable to an increase in indirect costs. These findings highlight the impact of productivity loss caused by early retirement, unemployment, working time reduction, and seizure-related days off., (© 2022 The Authors. Epilepsia published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy.)

Objective: This study was undertaken to quantify epilepsy-related costs of illness (COI) in Germany and identify cost-driving factors., Methods: COI were calculated among adults with epilepsy of different etiologies and severities. Multiple regression analysis was applied to determine any epilepsy-related and sociodemographic factors that serve as cost-driving factors., Results: In total, 486 patients were included, with a mean age of 40.5 ± 15.5 years (range = 18-83 years, 58.2% women). Mean 3-month COI were estimated at €4911, €2782, and €2598 for focal, genetic generalized, and unclassified epilepsy, respectively. The mean COI for patients with drug-refractory epilepsy (DRE; €7850) were higher than those for patients with non-DRE (€4720), patients with occasional seizures (€3596), or patients with seizures in remission for >1 year (€2409). Identified cost-driving factors for total COI included relevant disability (unstandardized regression coefficient b = €2218), poorer education (b = €2114), living alone (b = €2612), DRE (b = €1831), and frequent seizures (b = €2385). Younger age groups of 18-24 years (b = -€2945) and 25-34 years (b = -€1418) were found to have lower overall expenditures. A relevant disability (b = €441), DRE (b = €1253), frequent seizures (b = €735), and the need for specialized daycare (b = €749) were associated with higher direct COI, and poorer education (b = €1969), living alone (b = €2612), the presence of a relevant disability (b = €1809), DRE (b = €1831), and frequent seizures (b = €2385) were associated with higher indirect COI., Significance: This analysis provides up-to-date COI data for use in further health economics analyses, highlighting the high economic impacts associated with disease severity, disability, and disease-related loss of productivity among adult patients with epilepsy. The identified cost drivers could be used as therapeutic and socioeconomic targets for future cost-containment strategies., (© 2022 The Authors. Epilepsia published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy.)

Introduction: The steadily increasing impact of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) on reasonable diagnostic and therapeutic decisions makes the correct mapping of HRQOL indispensable in modern epileptology. The aim of this study was to address the reliability of the often-used generic HRQOL screening questionnaire EuroQOL 5-dimension, 3-level (EQ-5D-3L) by comparing its normalized index value (calculated via the time trade-off method) and visual analog scale (VAS) to the gold standard of the extensive Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory (QOLIE-31). QOLIE-10 scores were compared with the extensive QOLIE-31 and EQ-5D-3L TTO., Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of a monocentric study of 184 patients with epilepsy. Bivariate Spearman correlation analysis and Fisher's r-to-z transformation were used to compare the strengths of correlations of EQ-5D-3L, QOLIE-10 and QOLIE-31 with different epilepsy-specific domains (disease severity, drug interactions, emotional well-being, stigmatization, seizure-related anxiety, cognitive impairment)., Results: The different metrics of EQ-5D-3L, QOLIE-10 and QOLIE-31 showed moderate to very strong intra- and inter-metric correlations for overall HRQOL. Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory-31 VAS and EQ-5D-3L VAS did not show any significantly different strengths of correlations with respect to the domains studied. In contrast, the correlation strength of the normalized EQ-5D-3L index value differed significantly from the QOLIE-31 T-score for several domains, for example, for drug-related adverse events, neuropsychological deficits, symptoms of depression and seizure worry. In seizure-free patients, EQ-5D-3L VAS and EQ-5D-3L index values correlated significantly less with the domain of "cognitive impairment" than the QOLIE-31 T-score. In patients without relevant neuropsychological deficits, the strengths of correlations with the assessed domains did not differ significantly between EQ-5D-3L metrics and the QOLIE-31 T-score. The HRQOL mapping probability of QOLIE-10 was inferior to QOLIE-31 and comparable to EQ-5D-3L regarding the analyzed domains., Conclusion: In contrast to the EQ-5D-3L VAS, EQ-5D-3L index values do not adequately map health-related quality of life in severely affected patients with epilepsy and therefore should not be used as screening tools. The QOLIE-31 T-score remains the gold standard for HRQOL assessment in patients with epilepsy., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest LMW, JPR and NC report no conflicts of interest. SK reports speaker’s honoraria from Arvelle, Eisai, Epilog and UCB. FR reports personal fees from Arvelle Therapeutics, Desitin Arzneimittel, Eisai, GW Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Medtronic and UCB and grants from the Detlev-Wrobel-Fonds for Epilepsy Research, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, the LOEWE Programme of the State of Hesse and the European Union. AS reports personal fees and grants from Angelini Pharma/Arvelle Therapeutics, Desitin Arzneimittel, Eisai, GW Pharmaceuticals, Marinus Pharma, UCB Pharma, UNEEG Medical and Zogenix., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Our aim was to explore trends in price evolution and prescription volumes of anticonvulsants (AEDs, antiepileptic drugs) in Germany between 2000 and 2017., Method: This study used data from annual reports on mean prescription frequency and prices of defined daily doses (DDD) of AEDs in Germany to analyze nationwide trends. Interrupted time series (ITS) analysis was employed to test for significant effects of several statutory healthcare reforms in Germany on AED price evolution. These data were compared to cohort-based prescription patterns of four German cohort studies from 2003, 2008, 2013, and 2016 that included a total of 1368 patients with focal and generalized epilepsies., Results: Analysis of national prescription data between 2000 and 2017 showed that mean prices per DDD of third-generation AEDs decreased by 65% and mean prices of second-generation AEDs decreased by 36%, whereas mean prices of first-generation AEDs increased by 133%. Simultaneously, mean prescription frequency of third- generation AEDs increased by 2494%, while there was a substantial decrease in the use of first- (- 55%) and second- (- 16%) generation AEDs. ITS analysis revealed that in particular the introduction of mandatory rebates on drugs in 2003 affected prices of frequently used newer AEDs. These findings are consistent with data from cohort studies of epilepsy patients showing a general decrease of prices for frequently used AEDs in monotherapy by 62% and in combination therapies by 68%. The analysis suggests that overall expenses for AEDs remained stable despite an increase in the prescription of "newer" and "non-enzyme-inducing" AEDs for epilepsy patients., Conclusion: Between 2000 and 2017, a distinct decline in AED prices can be observed that seems predominately caused by a governmentally obtained price decline of third- and second-generation drugs. These observations seem to be the result of a German statutory cost containment policy applied across all health-care sectors. The increasing use of third-generation AEDs to the disadvantage of "old" and "enzyme-inducing" AEDs reflects the preferences of physicians and patients with epilepsy and follows national treatment guidelines.

This study evaluated trends in resource use and prescription patterns in patients with active epilepsy over a 10-year period at the same outpatient clinic of a German epilepsy center. We analyzed a cross-sectional patient sample of consecutive adults with active epilepsy over a 3-month period in 2013 and compared them with equally acquired data from the years 2003 and 2008. Using validated patient questionnaires, data on socioeconomic status, course of epilepsy, as well as direct and indirect costs were recorded. A total of 198 patients (mean age: 39.6±15.0years, 49.5% male) were enrolled and compared with our previous assessments in 2003 (n=101) and 2008 (n=151). In the 2013 cohort, 75.8% of the patients had focal epilepsy, and the majority were taking antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) (39.9% monotherapy, 59.1% polytherapy). We calculated epilepsy-specific costs of €3674 per three months per patient. Direct medical costs were mainly due to anticonvulsants (20.9% of total direct costs) and to hospitalization (20.8% of total direct costs). The proportion of enzyme-inducing anticonvulsants and 'old' AEDs decreased between 2003 and 2013. Indirect costs of €1795 in 2013 were mainly due to early retirement (55.0% of total indirect costs), unemployment (26.5%), and days off due to seizures (18.2%). In contrast to our previous findings from 2003 and 2008, our data show a stagnating cost increase with slightly reduced total costs and balanced direct and indirect costs in patients with active epilepsy. These findings are accompanied by an ongoing cost-neutral increase in the prescription of 'newer' and non-enzyme-inducing AEDs. However, the number and distribution of indirect cost components remained unchanged., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Nationwide analyses of drug use can provide a prevalence estimate of the underlying disease and can help in understanding the characteristics of treatment. This study aimed for such analyses regarding the utilization of antiepileptic drugs (AED) for epilepsy in Germany. In 2009, all 4,115,705 AED prescriptions of all German patients with statutory health insurance (70,011,508 persons) were retrospectively analyzed. The IMS(®) LRx database served as data source, which accesses nationwide pharmacy data centers processing all German prescription data. To establish the age and sex-specific percentage of patients taking AED because of epilepsy, we used a second database, Disease Analyzer(®), which covered a representative sample of the German population (7.2 million patients) and contained ICD10 codes alongside with prescription data. The period prevalence of patients taking AED because of epilepsy was 9.1/1,000 (children/adolescents: 5.2/1,000; elderly: 12.5/1,000). Of the patients, 83.1 % took at least one of four AED: valproate (29.8 %), carbamazepine (26.4 %), lamotrigine (21.4 %), and levetiracetam (16.9 %). Oxcarbazepine and sultiame were popular with pediatricians. Elderly patients frequently received phenytoin and primidone. More than half of the patients were treated by family physicians; 68 % took AED in monotherapy and 7.9 % received >2 AED (children/adolescents: 12.5 %). The costs for AED prescribed for epilepsy amounted to €285.1 Mio (median AED costs/patient: €158/a). The German 2009 prevalence of epileptic patients taking AED was 9.1/1,000. Family physicians cared for the majority of patients. Prevalence and prescribing patterns changed with age. Costs of AED against epilepsy added up to 1 % of total medication costs in Germany.

The objective of this review was to overview published cost-of-illness (COI) studies of epilepsy and their methodological approaches. Epilepsy imposes a substantial burden on individuals and society as a whole. The mean prevalence of epilepsy is estimated at 0.52% in Europe, 0.68% in the US, and peaks up to 1.5% in developing countries. Estimation of the economic burden of epilepsy is of pivotal relevance to enable a rational distribution of healthcare resources. This is especially so with the introduction of the newer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), the marketing of vagal-nerve stimulators and the resurgence of new surgical treatment options, which have the potential to considerably increase the costs of treating epilepsy.A systematic literature review was performed to identify studies that evaluated direct and indirect costs of epilepsy. Using a standardized assessment form, information on the study design, methodological framework and data sources were extracted from each publication and systematically reported. We identified 22 studies worldwide on costs of epilepsy. The majority of the studies reflected the costs of epilepsy in Europe (three studies each for the UK and Italy, one study each for Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, France and the EU) and the US (four studies), but studies were also available from India (two), Hong Kong, Oman, Burundi, Chile and Mexico. The studies utilized different frameworks to evaluate costs. All used a bottom-up approach; however, only 12 studies (55%) evaluated direct as well as indirect costs. The range for the mean annual direct costs lay between 40 International Dollar purchasing power parities (PPP-$) in rural Burundi and PPP-$4748 (adjusted to 2006 values) in a German epilepsy centre. Recent studies suggest AEDs are becoming the main contributor to direct costs. The mean indirect costs ranged between 12% and 85% of the total annual costs. Epilepsy is a cost-intensive disorder. A reliable comparison of the different COI studies in epilepsy is not easily feasible, as the evaluated studies show substantial methodological differences with respect to their patient selection criteria, diagnostic stratifications and evaluated costs. Therefore, there is an urgent need for studies that evaluate direct and indirect costs in a standardized fashion.

Background: Depending on the underlying etiology and epilepsy type, the burden of disease for patients with seizures can vary significantly. This analysis aimed to compare direct and indirect costs and quality of life (QoL) among adults with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) related with epilepsy, idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE), and focal epilepsy (FE) in Germany. Methods: Questionnaire responses from 92 patients with TSC and epilepsy were matched by age and gender, with responses from 92 patients with IGE and 92 patients with FE collected in independent studies. Comparisons were made across the main QoL components, direct costs (patient visits, medication usage, medical equipment, diagnostic procedures, ancillary treatments, and transport costs), indirect costs (employment, reduced working hours, missed days), and care level costs. Results: Across all three cohorts, mean total direct costs (TSC: €7602 [median €2620]; IGE: €1919 [median €446], P < 0.001; FE: €2598 [median €892], P < 0.001) and mean total indirect costs due to lost productivity over 3 months (TSC: €7185 [median €11,925]; IGE: €3599 [median €0], P < 0.001; FE: €5082 [median €2981], P = 0.03) were highest among patients with TSC. The proportion of patients with TSC who were unemployed (60%) was significantly larger than the proportions of patients with IGE (23%, P < 0.001) or FE (34%, P = P < 0.001) who were unemployed. Index scores for the EuroQuol Scale with 5 dimensions and 3 levels were significantly lower for patients with TSC (time-trade-off [TTO]: 0.705, visual analog scale [VAS]: 0.577) than for patients with IGE (TTO: 0.897, VAS: 0.813; P < 0.001) or FE (TTO: 0.879, VAS: 0.769; P < 0.001). Revised Epilepsy Stigma Scale scores were also significantly higher for patients with TSC (3.97) than for patients with IGE (1.48, P < 0.001) or FE (2.45, P < 0.001). Overall Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory-31 items scores was significantly lower among patients with TSC (57.7) and FE (57.6) than among patients with IGE (66.6, P = 0.004 in both comparisons). Significant differences between patients with TSC and IGE were also determined for Neurological Disorder Depression Inventory for Epilepsy (TSC: 13.1; IGE: 11.2, P = 0.009) and Liverpool Adverse Events Profile scores (TSC: 42.7; IGE: 37.5, P = 0.017) with higher score and worse results for TSC patients in both questionnaires. Conclusions: This study is the first to compare patients with TSC, IGE, and FE in Germany and underlines the excessive QoL burden and both direct and indirect cost burdens experienced by patients with TSC. Key points: • This is the first analysis to compare QoL and direct/indirect cost burden among patients with TSC, IGE, and FE in Germany. • Generic QoL for patients with TSC was significantly lower than for patients with IGE and FE. • Care grade and disability cards were more frequently obtained by patients with TSC than by patients in the other cohorts. • Drug treatment costs were the highest direct cost component for patients with TSC. • More patients with TSC than with IGE or FE were unemployed, and the mean indirect productivity costs were highest for the TSC cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To provide first data on inpatient costs and cost-driving factors due to nonrefractory status epilepticus ( NSE), refractory status epilepticus ( RSE), and super-refractory status epilepticus ( SRSE). Methods In 2013 and 2014, all adult patients treated due to status epilepticus ( SE) at the university hospitals in Frankfurt, Greifswald, and Marburg were analyzed for healthcare utilization. Results We evaluated 341 admissions in 316 patients (65.7 ± [standard deviation]18.2 years; 135 male) treated for SE. Mean costs of hospital treatment were €14,946 (median €5,278, range €776-€152,911, €787 per treatment day) per patient per admission, with a mean length of stay ( LOS) of 19.0 days (median 14.0, range 1-118). Course of SE had a significant impact on mean costs, with €8,314 in NSE (n = 137, median €4,597, €687 per treatment day, 22.3% of total inpatient costs due to SE), €13,399 in RSE (n = 171, median €7,203, €638/day, 45.0% of total costs, p < 0.001), and €50,488 in SRSE (n = 33, median €46,223, €1,365/day, 32.7% of total costs, p < 0.001). Independent cost-driving factors were SRSE, ventilation, and LOS of >14 days. Overall mortality at discharge was 14.4% and significantly higher in RSE/ SRSE (20.1%) than in NSE (5.8%). Significance Acute treatment of SE, and particularly SRSE and ventilation, are associated with high hospital costs and prolonged LOS. Extrapolation to the whole of Germany indicates that SE causes hospital costs of >€200 million per year. Along with the demographic change, incidence of SE will increase and costs for hospital treatment and sequelae of SE will rise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]