Real-World Treatment and Associated Healthcare Resource Use Among Migraine Patients in Germany

Fraence Hardtstock
{"title":"Real-World Treatment and Associated Healthcare Resource Use Among Migraine Patients in Germany","authors":"Fraence Hardtstock","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-57269/v1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: In order to evaluate unmet therapeutic need, this study sought to describe treatment patterns, as well as associated healthcare resource use (HCRU) and costs incurred by migraine patients in Germany.\n\nMethods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of a German claims dataset from 2013-2017, including over three million publicly-insured patients. Adult patients were included if they received at least one inpatient and/or two confirmed outpatient claims for headache/migraine from 2013-2016. Using prescription data from 2017, patients were separated into four main cohorts: those receiving prescriptions for (1) acute agents only, (2) prophylactic agents only, (3) both acute and prophylactic agents, and (4) neither acute nor prophylactic agents. Baseline characteristics were observed from 2013-2016; treatment and HCRU/cost outcomes were assessed in 2017.\n\nResults: In total, 199,283 patients were included in this analysis (mean age, 49.49 years; 73.04%, female) and 9,005 prophylactic therapy starters were identified. Overall, 43.47% of migraine patients did not receive acute or prophylactic medication in 2017, while 33.81% received only acute treatment, 9.45% received only prophylactic medication and 13.28% received both. Only 28.90% of patients initiating a prophylactic treatment were persistent after two years. HCRU was elevated for all groups, while direct costs ranged from €2,288-7,246 per year, and indirect costs ranged from €868-1,859.\n\nConclusions: Despite high levels of HCRU, few migraine patients were treated with prophylactic agents, and those who did were at an elevated risk of early discontinuation. Ultimately, these findings indicate a resounding need for safe, timely, and efficacious use of prophylaxis among migraine patients.","PeriodicalId":131981,"journal":{"name":"Annals Of Headache Medicine Journal","volume":"90 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals Of Headache Medicine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-57269/v1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: In order to evaluate unmet therapeutic need, this study sought to describe treatment patterns, as well as associated healthcare resource use (HCRU) and costs incurred by migraine patients in Germany. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of a German claims dataset from 2013-2017, including over three million publicly-insured patients. Adult patients were included if they received at least one inpatient and/or two confirmed outpatient claims for headache/migraine from 2013-2016. Using prescription data from 2017, patients were separated into four main cohorts: those receiving prescriptions for (1) acute agents only, (2) prophylactic agents only, (3) both acute and prophylactic agents, and (4) neither acute nor prophylactic agents. Baseline characteristics were observed from 2013-2016; treatment and HCRU/cost outcomes were assessed in 2017. Results: In total, 199,283 patients were included in this analysis (mean age, 49.49 years; 73.04%, female) and 9,005 prophylactic therapy starters were identified. Overall, 43.47% of migraine patients did not receive acute or prophylactic medication in 2017, while 33.81% received only acute treatment, 9.45% received only prophylactic medication and 13.28% received both. Only 28.90% of patients initiating a prophylactic treatment were persistent after two years. HCRU was elevated for all groups, while direct costs ranged from €2,288-7,246 per year, and indirect costs ranged from €868-1,859. Conclusions: Despite high levels of HCRU, few migraine patients were treated with prophylactic agents, and those who did were at an elevated risk of early discontinuation. Ultimately, these findings indicate a resounding need for safe, timely, and efficacious use of prophylaxis among migraine patients.
德国偏头痛患者的真实世界治疗和相关医疗资源使用
背景:为了评估未满足的治疗需求,本研究试图描述德国偏头痛患者的治疗模式,以及相关的医疗资源使用(HCRU)和费用。方法:我们对2013-2017年的德国索赔数据集进行了回顾性分析,其中包括300多万名公共保险患者。如果成年患者在2013-2016年期间至少收到一名住院和/或两名确诊的门诊头痛/偏头痛索赔,则纳入该研究。使用2017年的处方数据,将患者分为四个主要队列:接受处方的患者(1)仅使用急性药物,(2)仅使用预防药物,(3)同时使用急性和预防药物,(4)既不使用急性也不使用预防药物。2013-2016年观察基线特征;2017年对治疗和HCRU/成本结果进行了评估。结果:共纳入199,283例患者(平均年龄49.49岁;73.04%(女性)和9,005名开始预防性治疗者。总体而言,2017年43.47%的偏头痛患者未接受急性或预防性药物治疗,33.81%的患者仅接受急性治疗,9.45%的患者仅接受预防性药物治疗,13.28%的患者同时接受急性和预防性药物治疗。在开始预防性治疗的患者中,只有28.90%的患者在2年后仍能坚持治疗。所有组的HCRU均升高,而直接成本为每年2,288-7,246欧元,间接成本为868-1,859欧元。结论:尽管HCRU水平很高,但很少有偏头痛患者接受预防性药物治疗,而那些接受预防性药物治疗的患者早期停药的风险较高。最终,这些发现表明偏头痛患者需要安全、及时、有效地使用预防措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信