Multiple sclerosis in the UK: Service use, costs, quality of life and disability

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 26, Issue 10, 2008, Pages 847-860

  McCrone, Paul ^a   Heslin, Margaret ^a   Knapp, Martin ^a,b   Bull, Paul ^c   Thompson, Alan ^d  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cost of illness; Glatiramer acetate, therapeutic use; Interferon beta, therapeutic use; Multiple sclerosis, treatment

Indexed keywords

BACLOFEN; BETA INTERFERON; GLATIRAMER; TIZANIDINE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; DISABILITY; DRUG COST; ECONOMIC ASPECT; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRODUCTIVITY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RATING SCALE; UNEMPLOYMENT; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; COST OF ILLNESS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HEALTH SERVICES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

EID: 51949117761     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200826100-00005     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Blumhardt L, Wood C. The economics of multiple sclerosis: a cost of illness study. Br J Med Econ 1996; 10: 99-118
2. Holmes J, Madgwick T, Bates D. The cost of multiple sclerosis. Br J Med Econ 1995; 8: 181-93
3. Henriksson F, Jönsson B. The economic cost of multiple sclerosis in Sweden in 1994. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13: 597-606
4. Parkin D, McNamee P, Jacoby A, et al. A cost-utility analysis of interferon beta for multiple sclerosis. Health Technol Assess 1998; 2 (4): iii-54
5. Whetten-Goldstein K, Sloan F, Goldstein L, et al. A comprehensive assessment of the cost of multiple sclerosis in the United States. Mult Scler 1998; 4: 419-25
6. Murphy N, Confavreux C, Haas J, et al. Economic evaluation of multiple sclerosis in the UK, Germany and France. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13: 607-22
7. Kobelt G, Lindgren P, Parkin D, et al. Costs and quality of life in multiple sclerosis: a cross-sectional observational study in the UK [Stockholm School of Economics working paper series in economics and finance]. Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics, 2000
8. Miltenburger C, Kobelt G. Quality of life and cost of multiple sclerosis. Clin Neurol Neurosur 2002; 104: 272-5
9. Carton H, Loos R, Pacolet J, et al. Costs of professional care and informal help of severely disabled multiple sclerosis patients in Flanders (Belgium). Arch Pub Health 1997; 55: 239-59
10. Beecham J, Knapp M. Costing psychiatric interventions. In: Thornicroft G, editor. Measuring mental health needs. 2nd ed. London: Gaskell, 2001
11. Williams A. The role of the EuroQoL instrument in QALY calculations. York: Centre for Health Economics, University of York, 1995
12. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, et al. A social tariff for EuroQoL: results from a UK general population survey. York: Centre for Health Economics, University of York, 1995
13. Sharrack B, Hughes R. The Guy's Neurological Disability Scale (GNDS): a new disability measure for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 1999; 5: 223-33
14. Kurtzke JF. Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 1983; 33: 1444-52
15. Curtis L, Netten A. Unit costs of health and social care. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent, 2004
16. Netten A, Curtis L. Unit costs of health and social care. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent, 2002
17. Simpson S, Corney R, Fitzgerald P, et al. A randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of counselling patients with chronic depression. Health Technol Assess 2000; 4 (36): 1-83
18. McCrone P, Ridsdale L, Darbishire L, et al. Cost-effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy, graded exercise and usual care for patients with chronic fatigue in primary care. Psychol Med 2004; 34: 991-9
19. Department of Health. National Health Service schedule of reference costs 2004 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.doh.gov.uk/nhsexec/refcosts.htm [Accessed 2005 Jul 1]
20. British Medical Association/Royal Pharmaceutical Society. British National Formulary, 49. London: Pharmaceutical Press, 2005
21. Dobbs C. Patterns of pay: results of the annual survey of hours and earnings 1998 to 2004. Labour Market Trends 2005 Sep [online]. Available from URL: http://www.statistics.gov. uk/downloads/theme_labour/ashe/ASHE_2004web.pdf [Accessed 2008 Jun 13]
22. Curtis L. Unit costs of health and social care. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent, 2007
23. Richards RG, Sampson FC, Beard SM, et al. A review of the natural history and epidemiology of multiple sclerosis: implications for resource allocation and health economic models. Health Technol Assess 2002; 6 (10): 1-73
24. Fox CM, Bensa S, Bray I, et al. The epidemiology of multiple sclerosis in Devon: a comparison of the new and old classification criteria. J Neurol Neurosur Psychiatry 2004; 75: 56-60
25. Kobelt G, Berg J, Lindgren P, et al. Costs and quality of life of patients with multiple sclerosis in Europe. J Neurol Neurosur Psychiatry 2006; 77: 918-26
26. Brazier J, Roberts J, Tsuchiya A, et al. A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Econ 2004; 13: 873-84
27. Kind P, Hardman G, Macran S. UK population norms for EQ-5D[Centre for Health Economics discussion paper no. 172]. York: University of York, 1999
28. Hoogervorst ELJ, Eikelenboom MJ, Uitdehaag BMJ, et al. One year changes in disability in multiple sclerosis: neurological examination compared with patient self report. J Neurol Neurosur Psychiatry 2003; 74: 439-42
29. Hoogervorst EL, van Winsen LM, Eikelenboom MJ, et al. Comparisons of patients self-report, neurological examination, and functional impairment in MS. Neurology 2001; 56: 934-7
30. Kobelt G, Berg J, Lindgren P, et al. Costs and quality of life of multiple sclerosis in the United Kingdom. Eur J Health Econ 2006; 7 Suppl. 2: S96-S104
31. Gottberg K, Einarsson U, Ytterberg C, et al. Health-related quality of life in a population-based sample of people with multiple sclerosis in Stockholm County. Mult Scler 2006; 12: 605-12
32. Miller A, Dishon S. Health-related quality of life in multiple sclerosis: the impact of disability, gender and employment status. Qual Life Res 2006; 15: 259-71
33. Byford S, Leese M, Knapp M, et al. Comparison of alternative methods of collection of service use data for the economic evaluation of health care interventions. Health Econ 2007; 16: 531-6
34. Goldberg RW, Seybolt DC, Lehman A. Reliable self-report of health service use by individuals with serious mental illness. Psychiatr Serv 2002; 53: 879-81
35. Calsyn RJ, Allen G, Morse GA, et al. Can you trust self-report data provided by homeless mentally ill individuals? Evaluation Rev 1993; 17: 353-66
36. Patel A, Rendu A, Moran P, et al. A comparison of two methods of collecting economic data in primary care. Fam Pract 2005; 22: 323-7
37. Asche CV, Ho E, Chan B, et al. Economic consequences of multiple sclerosis for Canadians. Acta Neurol Scand 1997; 95: 268-74