IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v22y2021i3d10.1007_s10198-021-01269-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic and social cost of epilepsy in Poland: 5-year analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Joanna Jędrzejczak

    (Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education
    Epilepsy Diagnostic and Therapeutic Centre of Epilepsy Foundation of Epileptology)

  • Beata Majkowska-Zwolińska

    (Epilepsy Diagnostic and Therapeutic Centre of Epilepsy Foundation of Epileptology
    Łazarski University)

  • Anna Chudzicka-Bator

    (HTA Consulting sp. z o.o. sp. k)

  • Iwona Żerda

    (HTA Consulting sp. z o.o. sp. k)

  • Magdalena Władysiuk

    (Jagiellonian University)

  • Brian Godman

    (Strathclyde University
    Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge
    Liverpool University Management School
    Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University)

Abstract

Introduction Epilepsy affects nearly 50 million people around the world. As a common and chronic disease generates a high cost burden for healthcare system and patients. Aim We aimed to determine the most current direct and indirect costs of epilepsy in Poland from the social perspective for the years 2014–2018, to analyze the changes of expenditures over time, indicate trends and to determine key cost-drivers. Material and Methods Direct and indirect costs using a top-down approach were estimated based on the public institutions’ data for the ICD-10 codes G40 and G41. Direct costs included pharmacotherapy, hospitalizations, outpatient specialist care and rehabilitation. A human capital approach was used to estimate loss of productivity due to sick leaves and long-term inability to work. Results Annual total direct and indirect costs related to epilepsy accounted for EUR 410 million in 2014 and decreased in subsequent years to EUR 361 million in 2018. The indirect costs were dominant (76–83% of total costs) and in the majority related to the long-term absenteeism (87–92% of total indirect costs). In 2014–2018, patients with epilepsy generated EUR 341 million to EUR 282 million of indirect costs. Annual direct costs for patients with epilepsy were EUR 69 million in 2014 and increased to EUR 80 million in 2018. The biggest expenses were the costs of drugs (> 50%) and hospitalizations (~ 40%). Conclusions Epilepsy is an expensive disorder in terms of consumption of resources and social costs. Decision-makers should take it under special consideration.

Suggested Citation

  • Joanna Jędrzejczak & Beata Majkowska-Zwolińska & Anna Chudzicka-Bator & Iwona Żerda & Magdalena Władysiuk & Brian Godman, 2021. "Economic and social cost of epilepsy in Poland: 5-year analysis," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(3), pages 485-497, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:22:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s10198-021-01269-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-021-01269-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-021-01269-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-021-01269-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lucy Cunnama & Edina Sinanovic & Lebogang Ramma & Nicola Foster & Leigh Berrie & Wendy Stevens & Sebaka Molapo & Puleng Marokane & Kerrigan McCarthy & Gavin Churchyard & Anna Vassall, 2016. "Using Top‐down and Bottom‐up Costing Approaches in LMICs: The Case for Using Both to Assess the Incremental Costs of New Technologies at Scale," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(S1), pages 53-66, February.
    2. Lucy Cunnama & Edina Sinanovic & Lebogang Ramma & Nicola Foster & Leigh Berrie & Wendy Stevens & Sebaka Molapo & Puleng Marokane & Kerrigan McCarthy & Gavin Churchyard & Anna Vassall, 2016. "Using Top‐down and Bottom‐up Costing Approaches in LMICs: The Case for Using Both to Assess the Incremental Costs of New Technologies at Scale," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25, pages 53-66, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mennini, Francesco Saverio & Gitto, Lara, 2022. "Approaches to Estimating Indirect Costs in Healthcare: Motivations for Choice," MPRA Paper 112129, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sayem Ahmed & Md Zahid Hasan & Nausad Ali & Mohammad Wahid Ahmed & Emranul Haq & Sadia Shabnam & Morseda Chowdhury & Breda Gahan & Christine Bousquet & Jahangir A M Khan & Ziaul Islam, 2021. "Effectiveness of health voucher scheme and micro-health insurance scheme to support the poor and extreme poor in selected urban areas of Bangladesh: An assessment using a mixed-method approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(11), pages 1-31, November.
    2. Nicola Foster & Lucy Cunnama & Kerrigan McCarthy & Lebogang Ramma & Mariana Siapka & Edina Sinanovic & Gavin Churchyard & Katherine Fielding & Alison D Grant & Susan Cleary, 2021. "Strengthening health systems to improve the value of tuberculosis diagnostics in South Africa: A cost and cost-effectiveness analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-21, May.
    3. Catherine Pitt & Catherine Goodman & Kara Hanson, 2016. "Economic Evaluation in Global Perspective: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Recent Literature," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(S1), pages 9-28, February.
    4. Zhuoyu Wang & Nandini Dendukuri & Madhukar Pai & Lawrence Joseph, 2017. "Taking Costs and Diagnostic Test Accuracy into Account When Designing Prevalence Studies: An Application to Childhood Tuberculosis Prevalence," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 37(8), pages 922-929, November.
    5. Lelisa Fekadu Assebe & Wondesen Nigatu Belete & Senait Alemayehu & Elias Asfaw & Kora Tushune Godana & Yibeltal Kiflie Alemayehu & Alula M Teklu & Amanuel Yigezu, 2021. "Economic evaluation of Health Extension Program packages in Ethiopia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-16, February.
    6. Catherine Pitt & Anna Vassall & Yot Teerawattananon & Ulla K. Griffiths & Lorna Guinness & Damian Walker & Nicola Foster & Kara Hanson, 2016. "Foreword: Health Economic Evaluations in Low‐ and Middle‐income Countries: Methodological Issues and Challenges for Priority Setting," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(S1), pages 1-5, February.
    7. Bart Jacobs & Kelvin Hui & Veasnakiry Lo & Michael Thiede & Bernd Appelt & Steffen Flessa, 2019. "Costing for universal health coverage: insight into essential economic data from three provinces in Cambodia," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-14, December.
    8. Ulla Kou Griffiths & Rosa Legood & Catherine Pitt, 2016. "Comparison of Economic Evaluation Methods Across Low‐income, Middle‐income and High‐income Countries: What are the Differences and Why?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(S1), pages 29-41, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Epilepsy; Direct costs; Indirect costs; Productivity loss; Absenteeism;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H51 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Health
    • H55 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Social Security and Public Pensions
    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General
    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:22:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s10198-021-01269-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.