Search

Background: There are a lack of reliable data on the epidemiology and associated burden and costs of asthma. We sought to provide the first UK-wide estimates of the epidemiology, healthcare utilisation and costs of asthma.Methods: We obtained and analysed asthma-relevant data from 27 datasets: these comprised national health surveys for 2010-11, and routine administrative, health and social care datasets for 2011-12; 2011-12 costs were estimated in pounds sterling using economic modelling.Results: The prevalence of asthma depended on the definition and data source used. The UK lifetime prevalence of patient-reported symptoms suggestive of asthma was 29.5 % (95 % CI, 27.7-31.3; n = 18.5 million (m) people) and 15.6 % (14.3-16.9, n = 9.8 m) for patient-reported clinician-diagnosed asthma. The annual prevalence of patient-reported clinician-diagnosed-and-treated asthma was 9.6 % (8.9-10.3, n = 6.0 m) and of clinician-reported, diagnosed-and-treated asthma 5.7 % (5.7-5.7; n = 3.6 m). Asthma resulted in at least 6.3 m primary care consultations, 93,000 hospital in-patient episodes, 1800 intensive-care unit episodes and 36,800 disability living allowance claims. The costs of asthma were estimated at least £1.1 billion: 74 % of these costs were for provision of primary care services (60 % prescribing, 14 % consultations), 13 % for disability claims, and 12 % for hospital care. There were 1160 asthma deaths.Conclusions: Asthma is very common and is responsible for considerable morbidity, healthcare utilisation and financial costs to the UK public sector. Greater policy focus on primary care provision is needed to reduce the risk of asthma exacerbations, hospitalisations and deaths, and reduce costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We compared the costs and cost-effectiveness of telemonitoring vs usual care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A total of 256 patients were randomised to either telemonitoring or usual care. In the telemonitoring arm, the touch-screen telemonitoring equipment transmitted data to clinical teams monitoring the patients. Total healthcare costs were estimated over a 12-month period from a National Health Service perspective and quality adjusted life year (QALYs) were estimated by the EQ-5D tool. Telemonitoring was not significantly more costly than usual care (mean difference per patient £2065.90 (P < 0.18). The increased costs were predominantly due to telemonitoring service costs and non-significantly higher secondary care costs. Telemonitoring for COPD was not cost-effective at a base case of £137,277 per QALY with only 15% probability of being cost-effective at the usual threshold of £30,000 per QALY. Although there was some statistical and methodological uncertainty in the measures used, telemonitoring was not cost-effective in the sensitivity analyses performed. It seems unlikely that a telemonitoring service of the kind that was trialled would be cost-effective in providing care for people with COPD. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article discusses a study on the effectiveness of telemonitoring in managing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The study was a randomised controlled trial conducted in Great Britain that sought to determine whether the duration of hospitalization among COPD patients will be reduced if telemonitoring is integrated into existing clinical services. Under the trial, a total of 16 patients in the telemonitoring group died while in the control group the total number of deaths was 21.