Copyright ©ERS Journals Ltd 2002 Persistent asthma: disease control, resource utilisation and direct costs1 Pharmacoepidemiology Unit, EA643 and Poison Centre, 2 Clinical Pharmacology Unit, EA643, ClaudeBernard University and 3 Respiratory Medicine, South Lyon Hospital Centre University Hospital, Lyon, France. 4 Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA. 5 Pharmacoepidemiology Unit, McGill University, Montreal, Canada CORRESPONDENCE: E. Van Ganse, Centre Antipoison, Centre de Pharmacovigilance, Pavillon N, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, 69347, Cedex 03, France. Fax: 33 472666444. E-mail: eric.vanganse@chulyon.fr Keywords: asthma, control, health economics, resource utilisation, severity, therapy
Received: December 12, 2001
The Pharmacoepidemiology Unit is part of the EA643 (ClaudeBernard University, Lyon, France) and of the Poison Centre (E. Herriot Hospital, Lyon, France). The study was supported by the Biomed grant Nr BMH4 CT965033 and by Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA.
Despite evidence that adverse outcomes are less frequent when asthma management is optimised, the link between the level of control, disease severity and medical resource utilisation (MRU) is poorly documented. This relationship was investigated in a group of patients suffering from persistent asthma (Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2) in France. In 1998 a computerised family practice database was used to identify asthma patients aged 1750 yrs. Information from the database was complemented by a patient survey to retrospectively assess the level of asthma control and hospital contacts. Costs of MRU over a 12month study period were related to demographics, medical history, asthma control, and doses of inhaled corticosteroids prescribed during the prestudy period. A review of the computerised medical database identified 1,038 adult patients with persistent asthma, who completed the survey questionnaire. Over a 12month period, the mean cost of MRU was 549.8 E for wellcontrolled patients, 746.3 E per patient with moderate control, and 1,451.3 E per patient with poor control. Costs also increased significantly with age, access to free asthma care, comorbid conditions, asthma symptoms in the past year and whether inhaled corticosteroids had been prescribed before the study period. In patients with persistent asthma, large differences were observed in the use of medical resources according to control and severity. Therefore, if patients appropriately use prescribed control therapy, their use of medical resources may be reduced. Two factors should be distinguished in asthma: the degree of disease severity and the level of control achieved by the patient 1. Asthma severity can be considered as an intrinsic and rather stable characteristic of the disease for a given patient, i.e. the maximal level of impairment that asthma can bring to that patient, up to and including death; it is unclear how severity is affected by therapy 2. One way to assess severity is the level of corticosteroid prescription, inhaled or oral 3. By contrast, the level of control varies with time; it is primarily determined by contacts with allergens or infectious agents, and by therapy 4. In theory, the level of control can be influenced by patients, since they may influence two determinants of control, i.e. exposure to asthma triggers and adequate use of prescribed therapy. Control can also be influenced by how the healthcare system recognises and responds to patients who receive suboptimal therapy 5. Many studies suggest that, on average, asthma patients do not use controller medicines optimally and that the resulting undertreatment puts the patient at risk of adverse outcomes, including asthma exacerbations, unscheduled visits to the consulting room, emergency room (ER) contacts and hospitalisations. A recent study identified additional risks factors for visits to the ER by asthma patients: absence of predetermined crisis plan, previous visits to ER facilities, and inadequate use of prophylactic medicines during a flareup of an exacerbation 6. Poor compliance with controller medicines has been identified as a major determinant of hospitalisation due to asthma 7. Drugutilisation studies have shown that medical resource utilisation (MRU) is increased threefold among high users of inhaled ß-agonists. Furthermore, among these patients, hospital costs appear to be determined by disease severity 8. In their study, LANES et al. 9 found that 8% of asthma patients had either a hospital admission or an ER visit during a 12month study period; their hospital costs accounted for 25% of the total costs of asthma care. While studies confirm that a minority of patients use the majority of medical resources for asthma, the relationship between the use of medical resources and either control or severity needs clarification 10. Also, it is unclear whether the relationship between control and MRU varies according to the degree of asthma severity. The present study examined MRU in adult patients with persistent asthma in France. The objectives were to provide descriptive information about direct cost of asthma care, and to identify variables related to the costs of MRU, with a specific emphasis on the relationship between cost and level of control and its variation according to asthma severity.
Data sources Individual patient data were obtained from a computerised database, which was complemented by a patient survey. Details of study methods have been published previously and are summarised here 3. Patients agreed to participate after receiving written information on the study.
Computerised database
Patient survey
Study timelines
Study variables Data on annual MRU due to asthma were obtained from the computerised database (visits to the GP and all prescribed medications) and the patient survey (visits to ER and hospital contacts for asthma). Other information collected from BKLThalès included sex, age, smoking status, access to free healthcare for asthma and presence of comorbid conditions classified by BKLThalès into one of the following groups: cardiology, dermatology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, haematology, microbiology, neurology, otorhino laryngology, rheumatology, traumatology, nephrology. Prescription of inhaled corticosteroids during the baseline period was used as an indicator of asthma severity: high (at least 800 µg of budesonide·day1 or equivalent), moderate (<800 µg·day1), low (no use) 3.
The method that was used to assess asthma control was inspired by the definition by COCKCROFT and SWYSTUN 1 i.e, minimal symptoms and minimal requirement of shortacting relievers: the algorithm for control used in this study is presented in table 1
Patients were considered as having good, moderate or poor asthma control using a GINAderived algorithm that scored asthma symptoms and level of use of inhaled ß-agonists during the last 2 weeks 11. Specific costs were derived from MRU after multiplying each component by a unit cost for 1997, and were expressed in Euros (E). The unit cost estimate for visits to general practitioners (22.3 E) was obtained from the French Social Security (Caisse Nationale d'Assurance Maladie). The average cost for inpatient stay due to asthma in France (2,544.4 E) was obtained from the Programme de Médicalisation des Systèmes d'Information, the organisation responsible for computing diagnosisrelated group costs in France. This cost included all interventions applied during the hospital stay and inpatient therapy. The average cost for an asthmarelated ER visit (47.1 E) was determined by experts (University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France). Unit costs estimates for all prescribed medicines were obtained from the drug industry 12.
Data analysis
Descriptive information on costs
Correlates of total medical resource utilisation cost
Multivariate analysis Two linear regression models were defined, M0 and M1. Each model contained asthma severity and asthma control and the cofactors mentioned above. M1 also included the asthma control by asthma severity interaction to assess whether the level of control was modified by the degree of severity, or vice versa. The F-test was used to test whether the inclusion of the interaction improved the goodness of fit. The M0 model was accepted as the final multivariable model if the interaction was not statistically significant.
Demographics In the BKLThales database, 1,578 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 1,038 completed the questionnaire (65.8%); these patients are described in table 2
These 1,038 patients did not differ from the other 540 with respect to age, sex, smoking status, asthma severity and access to free asthma care. However comorbid conditions were slightly more common in patients who completed the questionnaire (p=0.04). In these 1,038 patients, mean age was 36.0 yrs (median 38.0, range 1750 yrs). The level of asthma control could not be determined for 101 of 1,038 responders to questionnaires. Patients with no valid data for asthma control did not differ from their 937 counterparts as to the variables mentioned above. Among 901 patients with complete information for both asthma control and severity, no significant association emerged between these two variables (p=0.37).
Descriptive cost analysis
A majority of the 1,038 patients visited their GP and received prescriptions for antiasthma medicines during the study period (table 3
Total medical resource utilisation costs Median cost was 278.0 E and 25th and 75th percentiles were 133.4 E and 587.1 E, respectively. Total MRU costs ranged from 051,674 E, with an asymmetric distribution (fig. 3
Correlates of medical resource utilisation costs Variations of total MRU costs according to asthma control, asthma severity and other cofactors are displayed in table 4
Poor control and greater severity were both associated with higher MRU cost. The mean cost for patients with poorly controlled asthma was more than twice the cost for wellcontrolled patients. A significant increase in the MRU cost, according to levels of control, was also observed in all degrees of asthma severity. There was no difference in total cost between 937 patients who mentioned their asthma control and the 101 others who did not (Wilcoxon test, p=0.78), or between patients with and without valid data for asthma severity (Wilcoxon test, p=0.90). Age and access to free asthma care was also significantly associated with increased total MRU cost.
Multivariate analysis
The level of asthma control as measured by recent symptoms is a major correlate of total MRU, including drug therapy, ambulatory care and hospital care in persistent asthma, increasing substantially with lesser levels of control. Poorly controlled asthma resulted in a significant 2.5fold increase in MRU costs, compared to wellcontrolled disease. Asthma severity, as judged by the prescribed doses of inhaled corticosteroids in the prestudy period, was also associated with a significant increase in MRU costs independently of other cofactors. Finally, the following factors were also associated with increased cost of care: age, access to free asthma care, presence of comorbid conditions and asthma symptoms in the past year. Both the level of control and degree of severity, as measured in this study, are correlates of MRU. Level of control and asthma severity were identified from distinct sources and at different points in time: prescription information for severity, i.e. the dose of inhaled corticosteroids prescribed by the family physician before the study period; and patient data for assessment of control, i.e. the patient's response to a specific questionnaire at the end of the study period. The level of control was assessed for a 2-week period at the end of the study period. However, this level of control may reflect the patients' attitude towards asthma medications drug observance and avoidance of risk factors throughout the study period. In a recent survey, VOLLMER et al. 13 found that a shortterm control index was significantly related to healthcare utilisation in a consecutive 12month period.
Asthma severity was assessed from average doses of prescribed inhaled corticosteroids during a baseline prestudy period (fig. 1 Control of asthma also had an important effect on costs, independently of severity. Poor control was associated with higher MRU in the preceding 12 months, suggesting that a significant part of the burden of asthma could be prevented with improved disease management. The comparison of MRU across levels of control within different degrees of severity is of interest. In all severity categories, costs increased significantly with decreasing levels of control. In each category, costs for "wellcontrolled" patients could be interpreted as indicative of the "minimal" costs of asthma care according to disease severity. A priori, such costs are nonpreventable, in contrast to the costs computed in groups with lesser levels of control. Age correlation with cost is not surprising, since age is a known risk factor for resource consumption in asthma, as in other conditions 16. The significant relationship between comorbid conditions and cost was less expected in this rather young population (1750 yrs) where asthma was the major morbidity. It suggests that conditions linked to asthma may have an impact on resource consumption 17. Concomitant psychiatric troubles have been shown to be associated with increased asthma morbidity, and they may contribute to increased costs 18. Having access to free asthma care also resulted in higher costs of MRU. These patients were older and had more comorbid conditions, but multivariate analyses suggested that access to free asthma care was associated with higher costs independent of these characteristics. This finding is in agreement with the purposes of access to free asthma care in France, provided to patients with more severe disease, independent of their socioeconomic status, after review of their medical history by Social Security experts. Only crude comparisons can be made between the data presented here and information available for other countries. BARNES et al. 19 made a comparison of direct costs between countries; depending on the country and the study, hospital contacts comprised between 1879% of direct costs, i.e. generally a lesser portion of the costs of MRU than in this study. BARNES et al. 19 found that improved control was associated with an increase in drug costs and more visits to the GP. It should be stressed that, as a result of the selection of patients with persistent asthma, the present data did not allow valid estimates of the total asthma burden in the French population, in contrast to data published by other investigators 1921. Another effect of the selection of patients with persistent asthma may have been the relatively high incidence of hospital contacts. Nevertheless, this is also the result of efforts to collect data on this outcome directly from patients. The current authors have indeed demonstrated that care givers are not optimally informed of outcomes in asthma patients, and using family physician data may result in underestimates of the hospitalcontacts incidence 22. These points underline some limitations of using a GP prescription database in asthma outcomes research. However, important advantages should also be acknowledged, i.e. that such databases may be considered as a more valid tool to assess asthma severity than drug dispensing databases, since data are available on actual GP's prescriptions of inhaled corticosteroids. Those prescriptions may be considered as being a reflection of the care givers' instant perception of asthma control, at least in settings and at times where such prescriptions were issued with some reluctance 23. A selection criteria prescribed was at least three canisters of inhaled ß-agonists during the 6-month period before the onset of the study. This could be considered as high ß-agonists consumption, but it was consistent with ß-agonists prescription patterns by GPs in France until recently. This study had some other limitations. To compute medication costs, several assumptions were made, for example that patients took their prescriptions. Average costs were used to estimate the impact of admission to hospital for asthma, since there was no access to individual inpatient hospitalresource consumption data. Also, there may be recall bias in the responses to the survey questions, e.g. with some patients over or underestimating their rate of hospital admission. A selection bias could affect the results if there was a systematic, nonrandom, factor influencing the patient's decision to complete and return the questionnaire; 1,038 responders to questionnaires would then be different from 540 nonresponders. However, there were no significant differences between these two groups in demographic variables and asthma severity, though records of comorbid conditions were slightly higher among the 1,038 responders (p<0.04). Of 1,038 participants who completed the questionnaire, 101 did not answer specific questions for asthma control. This could represent another selection bias. However, patients with missing information on control did not differ from 937 others for costs or any variable in the study. If a selection bias cannot be excluded, its influence should be limited. Multivariate analyses were conducted in only 872 patients with nonnull total MRU cost and valid data for all covariates. Except for comorbid conditions, these 872 subjects did not differ from their 166 counterparts for any other studied variables (data not reported). Furthermore, all multivariate results were consistent with univariate analyses. In the final linear model, global R2 did not exceed 0.17. Only a limited number of correlates for costs were identified. For example, the authors had no information on socioeconomic status, on education level, or on the attitude of the patients 24. However, a gradient of resource consumption was identified according to increasing severity or decreasing control, and this provided support to the assessment of these two diseases characteristics, and their relationship to resource consumption. In summary, the results suggest that the major part of the cost burden of asthma is a consequence of both poor control and greater severity, especially for major outcomes, such as hospital admissions. Improvement in asthma control through improved disease management could potentially result in significant savings, in patient morbidity and costs to society 25. The findings also confirm that information obtained directly from patients is a useful addition to database information 3. The linkage of medical records to a specific patient survey may help to understand the complex relationship between severity and control in asthma, and to identify preferred areas of interventions to relieve the burden of asthma.
This article has been cited by other articles:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||