Suchergebnisse

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Stroke affects mortality, functional ability, quality of life and incurs costs. The primary objective of this study was to estimate the costs of stroke care in Sweden by level of disability and stroke type (ischemic (IS) or hemorrhagic stroke (ICH)). METHOD: Resource use during first and second year following a stroke was estimated based on a research database containing linked data from several registries. Costs were estimated for the acute and post-acute management of stroke, including direct (health care consumption and municipal services) and indirect (productivity losses) costs. Resources and costs were estimated per stroke type and functional disability categorised by Modified Rankin Scale (mRS). RESULTS: The results indicated that the average costs per patient following a stroke were 350,000SEK/€37,000-480,000SEK/€50,000, dependent on stroke type and whether it was the first or second year post stroke. Large variations were identified between different subgroups of functional disability and stroke type, ranging from annual costs of 100,000SEK/€10,000-1,100,000SEK/€120,000 per patient, with higher costs for patients with ICH compared to IS and increasing costs with more severe functional disability. CONCLUSION: Functional outcome is a major determinant on costs of stroke care. The stroke type associated with worse outcome (ICH) was also consistently associated to higher costs. Measures to improve function are not only important to individual patients and their family but may also decrease the societal burden of stroke.

SUMMARY: This report describes epidemiology, burden, and treatment of osteoporosis in each of the 27 countries of the European Union plus Switzerland and the UK (EU 27+2). INTRODUCTION: The aim of this report was to characterize the burden of osteoporosis in each of the countries of the European Union plus Switzerland and the UK in 2019 and beyond. METHODS: The data on fracture incidence and costs of fractures in the EU27+2 was taken from a concurrent publication in this journal (SCOPE 2021: a new scorecard for osteoporosis in Europe) and country-specific information extracted. The information extracted covered four domains: burden of osteoporosis and fractures; policy framework; service provision; and service uptake. RESULTS: The clinical and economic burden of osteoporotic fractures in 2019 is given for each of the 27 countries of the EU plus Switzerland and the UK. Each domain was ranked and the country performance set against the scorecard for all nations studied. Data were also compared with the first SCOPE undertaken in 2010. Fifteen of the 16 score card metrics on healthcare provision were used in the two surveys. Scores had improved or markedly improved in 15 countries, remained constant in 8 countries and worsened in 3 countries. The average treatment gap increased from 55% in 2010 to 71% in 2019. Overall, 10.6 million women who were eligible for treatment were untreated in 2010. In 2019, this number had risen to 14.0 million. CONCLUSIONS: In spite of the high cost of osteoporosis, a substantial treatment gap and projected increase of the economic burden driven by aging populations, the use of pharmacological prevention of osteoporosis has decreased in recent years, suggesting that a change in healthcare policy concerning the disease is warranted.

This report describes epidemiology, burden, and treatment of osteoporosis in each of the 27 countries of the European Union plus Switzerland and the UK (EU 27+2). Introduction: the aim of this report was to characterize the burden of osteoporosis in each of the countries of the European Union plus Switzerland and the UK in 2019 and beyond. Methods: the data on fracture incidence and costs of fractures in the EU27+2 was taken from a concurrent publication in this journal (SCOPE 2021: a new scorecard for osteoporosis in Europe) and country-specific information extracted. The information extracted covered four domains: burden of osteoporosis and fractures; policy framework; service provision; and service uptake. Results: the clinical and economic burden of osteoporotic fractures in 2019 is given for each of the 27 countries of the EU plus Switzerland and the UK. Each domain was ranked and the country performance set against the scorecard for all nations studied. Data were also compared with the first SCOPE undertaken in 2010. Fifteen of the 16 score card metrics on healthcare provision were used in the two surveys. Scores had improved or markedly improved in 15 countries, remained constant in 8 countries and worsened in 3 countries. The average treatment gap increased from 55% in 2010 to 71% in 2019. Overall, 10.6 million women who were eligible for treatment were untreated in 2010. In 2019, this number had risen to 14.0 million. Conclusions: in spite of the high cost of osteoporosis, a substantial treatment gap and projected increase of the economic burden driven by aging populations, the use of pharmacological prevention of osteoporosis has decreased in recent years, suggesting that a change in healthcare policy concerning the disease is warranted.

SUMMARY: This scorecard summarises key indicators of the burden of osteoporosis and its management in the 27 member states of the European Union, as well as the UK and Switzerland. The resulting scorecard elements, assembled on a single sheet, provide a unique overview of osteoporosis in Europe. INTRODUCTION: The scorecard for osteoporosis in Europe (SCOPE) is a project of the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) that seeks to raise awareness of osteoporosis care in Europe. The aim of this project was to develop a scorecard and background documents to draw attention to gaps and inequalities in the provision of primary and secondary prevention of fractures due to osteoporosis. METHODS: The SCOPE panel reviewed the information available on osteoporosis and the resulting fractures for each of the 27 countries of the European Union plus the UK and Switzerland (termed EU27+2). The information obtained covered four domains: background information (e.g. the burden of osteoporosis and fractures), policy framework, service provision and service uptake, e.g. the proportion of men and women at high risk that do not receive treatment (the treatment gap). RESULTS: There was a marked difference in fracture risk among the EU27+2 countries. Of concern was the marked heterogeneity in the policy framework, service provision and service uptake for osteoporotic fracture that bore little relation to the fracture burden. For example, despite the wide availability of treatments to prevent fractures, in the majority of the EU27+2, only a minority of patients at high risk receive treatment even after their first fracture. The elements of each domain in each country were scored and coded using a traffic light system (red, orange, green) and used to synthesise a scorecard. The resulting scorecard elements, assembled on a single sheet, provide a unique overview of osteoporosis in Europe. CONCLUSIONS: The scorecard enables healthcare professionals and policy makers to assess their country's general approach to the disease and provide ...

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic status, origin or demographic attributes shall not determine the quality of healthcare delivery, according to e.g. United Nations and European Union rules. Health equity has been defined as the absence of systematic disparities and unwarranted differences between groups defined by differences in social advantages. A study was performed to investigate whether this was applicable to type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) care in a setting with universal, tax-funded healthcare. METHODS: This retrospective registry-study was based on patient-level data from individuals diagnosed with T1D during 2010-2011 (n = 16,367) in any of seven Swedish county councils (covering ~65% of the Swedish population). Health equity in T1D care was analysed through multivariate regression analyses on absolute HbA1c level at one-year follow-up, one-year change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and one-year change in cardiovascular risk score, using selected sociodemographic dimensions as case-mix factors. RESULTS: Higher educational level was consistently associated with lower levels of HbA1c, and so was being married. Never married was associated with worse eGFR development, and lower educational level was associated with higher cardiovascular risk. Women had higher HbA1c levels than men, and glucose control was significantly worse in patients below the age of 25. CONCLUSION: Patients' sociodemographic profile was strongly associated with absolute levels of risk factor control in T1D, but also with an increased annual deterioration in eGFR. Whether these systematic differences stem from patient-related problems or healthcare organisational shortcomings is a matter for further research. The results, though, highlight the need for intensified diabetes management education and secondary prevention directed towards T1D patients, taking sociodemographic characteristics into account.

Background Socioeconomic status, origin or demographic attributes shall not determine the quality of healthcare delivery, according to e.g. United Nations and European Union rules. Health equity has been defined as the absence of systematic disparities and unwarranted differences between groups defined by differences in social advantages. A study was performed to investigate whether this was applicable to type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) care in a setting with universal, tax-funded healthcare. Methods This retrospective registry-study was based on patient-level data from individuals diagnosed with T1D during 2010-2011 (n = 16,367) in any of seven Swedish county councils (covering -65% of the Swedish population). Health equity in T1D care was analysed through multivariate regression analyses on absolute HbA1c level at one-year follow-up, one-year change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and one-year change in cardiovascular risk score, using selected sociodemographic dimensions as case-mix factors. Results Higher educational level was consistently associated with lower levels of HbA1c, and so was being married. Never married was associated with worse eGFR development, and lower educational level was associated with higher cardiovascular risk. Women had higher HbA1c levels than men, and glucose control was significantly worse in patients below the age of 25. Conclusion Patients' sociodemographic profile was strongly associated with absolute levels of risk factor control in T1 D, but also with an increased annual deterioration in eGFR. Whether these systematic differences stem from patient-related problems or healthcare organisational shortcomings is a matter for further research. The results, though, highlight the need for intensified diabetes management education and secondary prevention directed towards T1D patients, taking sociodemographic characteristics into account.

Background: Socioeconomic status, origin or demographic attributes shall not determine the quality of healthcare delivery, according to e.g. United Nations and European Union rules. Health equity has been defined as the absence of systematic disparities and unwarranted differences between groups defined by differences in social advantages. A study was performed to investigate whether this was applicable to type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) care in a setting with universal, tax-funded healthcare. Methods: This retrospective registry-study was based on patient-level data from individuals diagnosed with T1D during 2010-2011 (n = 16,367) in any of seven Swedish county councils (covering -65% of the Swedish population). Health equity in T1D care was analysed through multivariate regression analyses on absolute HbA1c level at one-year follow-up, one-year change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and one-year change in cardiovascular risk score, using selected sociodemographic dimensions as case-mix factors. Results: Higher educational level was consistently associated with lower levels of HbA1c, and so was being married. Never married was associated with worse eGFR development, and lower educational level was associated with higher cardiovascular risk. Women had higher HbA1c levels than men, and glucose control was significantly worse in patients below the age of 25. Conclusion: Patients' sociodemographic profile was strongly associated with absolute levels of risk factor control in T1 D, but also with an increased annual deterioration in eGFR. Whether these systematic differences stem from patient-related problems or healthcare organisational shortcomings is a matter for further research. The results, though, highlight the need for intensified diabetes management education and secondary prevention directed towards T1D patients, taking sociodemographic characteristics into account.