Evaluation of healthcare costs and utilization for patients with gout: a population-based matched cohort study

Yi-Yun Lee, Chao-Hsiun Tang, Jin-Hua Chen, Li-Na Kuo, Yu Ko

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives: To better understand the economic burden of gout patients in Taiwan, a nationwide retrospective study was conducted to compare the healthcare costs and utilization between gout and gout-free patients. Methods: The Longitudinal Health Insurance Database (LHID) 2010 was used to identify gout cases and matched gout-free controls. Gout cases were defined as having (1) at least three instances of diagnoses of gout on medical claims, or (2) one diagnosis of gout with at least one gout-related pharmacy claim in 2011. A control cohort was matched with cases at a 3:1 ratio by age, gender, residential area, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index. All medical utilization and costs per patient within the 365 days following the index date were compared between cases and controls. Results: Out of 993,332 beneficiaries, a total of 21,376 matched gout patients met the gout inclusion criteria. Compared to controls, gout patients had more outpatient visits (mean = 31.2 vs 22.6), inpatient visits (mean = 1.7 vs 1.5), and ER visits (mean = 1.9 vs 1.7) (all p <.0001), as well as more outpatient costs (median = USD $634 vs $404), inpatient costs (median = USD $1330 vs $1254), and ER costs (median = USD $87 vs $89) (all p <.05). Conclusion: Gout patients had higher medical utilization and costs than gout-free patients. In gout patients, all-cause and gout-related utilization were mostly outpatient visits, whereas most of the all-cause and gout-related costs were due to hospitalization. The study findings could be useful for future economic evaluations and healthcare resource allocation.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)735-740
Number of pages6
JournalCurrent Medical Research and Opinion
Volume34
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 3 2018

Fingerprint

Gout
Health Care Costs
Cohort Studies
Population
Costs and Cost Analysis
Outpatients
Inpatients
Resource Allocation
Health Insurance
Taiwan

Keywords

  • Cost of gout
  • Cost of illness
  • Gout
  • Health economics
  • Pharmacoeconomics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

@article{b5135cd21e484b25b3e31b76efef2475,
title = "Evaluation of healthcare costs and utilization for patients with gout: a population-based matched cohort study",
abstract = "Objectives: To better understand the economic burden of gout patients in Taiwan, a nationwide retrospective study was conducted to compare the healthcare costs and utilization between gout and gout-free patients. Methods: The Longitudinal Health Insurance Database (LHID) 2010 was used to identify gout cases and matched gout-free controls. Gout cases were defined as having (1) at least three instances of diagnoses of gout on medical claims, or (2) one diagnosis of gout with at least one gout-related pharmacy claim in 2011. A control cohort was matched with cases at a 3:1 ratio by age, gender, residential area, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index. All medical utilization and costs per patient within the 365 days following the index date were compared between cases and controls. Results: Out of 993,332 beneficiaries, a total of 21,376 matched gout patients met the gout inclusion criteria. Compared to controls, gout patients had more outpatient visits (mean = 31.2 vs 22.6), inpatient visits (mean = 1.7 vs 1.5), and ER visits (mean = 1.9 vs 1.7) (all p <.0001), as well as more outpatient costs (median = USD $634 vs $404), inpatient costs (median = USD $1330 vs $1254), and ER costs (median = USD $87 vs $89) (all p <.05). Conclusion: Gout patients had higher medical utilization and costs than gout-free patients. In gout patients, all-cause and gout-related utilization were mostly outpatient visits, whereas most of the all-cause and gout-related costs were due to hospitalization. The study findings could be useful for future economic evaluations and healthcare resource allocation.",
keywords = "Cost of gout, Cost of illness, Gout, Health economics, Pharmacoeconomics",
author = "Yi-Yun Lee and Chao-Hsiun Tang and Jin-Hua Chen and Li-Na Kuo and Yu Ko",
year = "2018",
month = "4",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1080/03007995.2017.1417826",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "735--740",
journal = "Current Medical Research and Opinion",
issn = "0300-7995",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of healthcare costs and utilization for patients with gout

T2 - a population-based matched cohort study

AU - Lee, Yi-Yun

AU - Tang, Chao-Hsiun

AU - Chen, Jin-Hua

AU - Kuo, Li-Na

AU - Ko, Yu

PY - 2018/4/3

Y1 - 2018/4/3

N2 - Objectives: To better understand the economic burden of gout patients in Taiwan, a nationwide retrospective study was conducted to compare the healthcare costs and utilization between gout and gout-free patients. Methods: The Longitudinal Health Insurance Database (LHID) 2010 was used to identify gout cases and matched gout-free controls. Gout cases were defined as having (1) at least three instances of diagnoses of gout on medical claims, or (2) one diagnosis of gout with at least one gout-related pharmacy claim in 2011. A control cohort was matched with cases at a 3:1 ratio by age, gender, residential area, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index. All medical utilization and costs per patient within the 365 days following the index date were compared between cases and controls. Results: Out of 993,332 beneficiaries, a total of 21,376 matched gout patients met the gout inclusion criteria. Compared to controls, gout patients had more outpatient visits (mean = 31.2 vs 22.6), inpatient visits (mean = 1.7 vs 1.5), and ER visits (mean = 1.9 vs 1.7) (all p <.0001), as well as more outpatient costs (median = USD $634 vs $404), inpatient costs (median = USD $1330 vs $1254), and ER costs (median = USD $87 vs $89) (all p <.05). Conclusion: Gout patients had higher medical utilization and costs than gout-free patients. In gout patients, all-cause and gout-related utilization were mostly outpatient visits, whereas most of the all-cause and gout-related costs were due to hospitalization. The study findings could be useful for future economic evaluations and healthcare resource allocation.

AB - Objectives: To better understand the economic burden of gout patients in Taiwan, a nationwide retrospective study was conducted to compare the healthcare costs and utilization between gout and gout-free patients. Methods: The Longitudinal Health Insurance Database (LHID) 2010 was used to identify gout cases and matched gout-free controls. Gout cases were defined as having (1) at least three instances of diagnoses of gout on medical claims, or (2) one diagnosis of gout with at least one gout-related pharmacy claim in 2011. A control cohort was matched with cases at a 3:1 ratio by age, gender, residential area, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index. All medical utilization and costs per patient within the 365 days following the index date were compared between cases and controls. Results: Out of 993,332 beneficiaries, a total of 21,376 matched gout patients met the gout inclusion criteria. Compared to controls, gout patients had more outpatient visits (mean = 31.2 vs 22.6), inpatient visits (mean = 1.7 vs 1.5), and ER visits (mean = 1.9 vs 1.7) (all p <.0001), as well as more outpatient costs (median = USD $634 vs $404), inpatient costs (median = USD $1330 vs $1254), and ER costs (median = USD $87 vs $89) (all p <.05). Conclusion: Gout patients had higher medical utilization and costs than gout-free patients. In gout patients, all-cause and gout-related utilization were mostly outpatient visits, whereas most of the all-cause and gout-related costs were due to hospitalization. The study findings could be useful for future economic evaluations and healthcare resource allocation.

KW - Cost of gout

KW - Cost of illness

KW - Gout

KW - Health economics

KW - Pharmacoeconomics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85043455856&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85043455856&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/03007995.2017.1417826

DO - 10.1080/03007995.2017.1417826

M3 - Article

C2 - 29243513

VL - 34

SP - 735

EP - 740

JO - Current Medical Research and Opinion

JF - Current Medical Research and Opinion

SN - 0300-7995

IS - 4

ER -