The Healthcare Resource Utilization of Patients with Refractory Chronic Cough Compared to Those with Non-Refractory Chronic Cough.

IF 3.9 2区医学 Q1 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM

Lung Pub Date : 2025-10-04 DOI:10.1007/s00408-025-00853-z

Laurent Guilleminault, Clairelyne Dupin, Laurent Portel, Maeva Zysman, Thomas Flament, Pauline Roux, Nadège Costa, Michael Mounié

{"title":"The Healthcare Resource Utilization of Patients with Refractory Chronic Cough Compared to Those with Non-Refractory Chronic Cough.","authors":"Laurent Guilleminault, Clairelyne Dupin, Laurent Portel, Maeva Zysman, Thomas Flament, Pauline Roux, Nadège Costa, Michael Mounié","doi":"10.1007/s00408-025-00853-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Refractory chronic cough (RCC) significantly impairs patient quality of life and poses a major challenge in clinical management. However, little is known about the healthcare resource utilization (HRU) of patients with RCC.Objective: The goal of our study is to describe the HRU and associated costs of RCC patients and those with non-refractory chronic cough (non-RCC).Methods: Patients with chronic cough were prospectively recruited from 6 centers in France. At 6 months, the patients were classified as having RCC or no RCC. A retrospective analysis was made using the French National Health Insurance Database (SNDS) in order to determine healthcare utilization for the one-year period preceding inclusion at the site and for the one-year period thereafter.Results: Sixty-eight patients were included. Among them, 32 (47%) patients had RCC. There was no difference between groups regarding clinical data apart from cough duration (56.8 ± 59.5 months in the no RCC group vs. 139.3 ± 123.8 months in the RCC group, p = 0.002). Within 1 year prior to inclusion, there was no difference in terms of drug dispensations between the 2 groups. During the 1-year post-inclusion period, a significantly higher proportion of patients with RCC received at least one dispensation of opioids and amitriptyline compared to those with no RCC (8 (25%) vs. 2 (6%) for opioids, p = 0.038 and 14 (44%) vs. 3 (8%) for amitriptyline, p = 0.0015, respectively). Within 1 year after inclusion, more patients with RCC had attended speech pathologist visits in comparison to patients with no RCC (14 (44%) patients vs. 10 (28%) patients, p = 0.21, respectively). Total costs within 12 months prior to inclusion were 3,878€ [2,498 - 5,755€] for patients with no RCC and 5,159€ [3,426 - 7,138€] with RCC, but the difference was not significant. No change occurred in the 1-year period following inclusion.Conclusion: RCC has a high healthcare utilization with substantial costs.","PeriodicalId":18163,"journal":{"name":"Lung","volume":"203 1","pages":"97"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lung","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00408-025-00853-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Refractory chronic cough (RCC) significantly impairs patient quality of life and poses a major challenge in clinical management. However, little is known about the healthcare resource utilization (HRU) of patients with RCC.

Objective: The goal of our study is to describe the HRU and associated costs of RCC patients and those with non-refractory chronic cough (non-RCC).

Methods: Patients with chronic cough were prospectively recruited from 6 centers in France. At 6 months, the patients were classified as having RCC or no RCC. A retrospective analysis was made using the French National Health Insurance Database (SNDS) in order to determine healthcare utilization for the one-year period preceding inclusion at the site and for the one-year period thereafter.

Results: Sixty-eight patients were included. Among them, 32 (47%) patients had RCC. There was no difference between groups regarding clinical data apart from cough duration (56.8 ± 59.5 months in the no RCC group vs. 139.3 ± 123.8 months in the RCC group, p = 0.002). Within 1 year prior to inclusion, there was no difference in terms of drug dispensations between the 2 groups. During the 1-year post-inclusion period, a significantly higher proportion of patients with RCC received at least one dispensation of opioids and amitriptyline compared to those with no RCC (8 (25%) vs. 2 (6%) for opioids, p = 0.038 and 14 (44%) vs. 3 (8%) for amitriptyline, p = 0.0015, respectively). Within 1 year after inclusion, more patients with RCC had attended speech pathologist visits in comparison to patients with no RCC (14 (44%) patients vs. 10 (28%) patients, p = 0.21, respectively). Total costs within 12 months prior to inclusion were 3,878€ [2,498 - 5,755€] for patients with no RCC and 5,159€ [3,426 - 7,138€] with RCC, but the difference was not significant. No change occurred in the 1-year period following inclusion.

Conclusion: RCC has a high healthcare utilization with substantial costs.

查看原文本刊更多论文

难治性慢性咳嗽患者与非难治性慢性咳嗽患者的医疗资源利用比较。

背景：难治性慢性咳嗽（RCC）严重影响患者的生活质量，对临床治疗提出了重大挑战。然而，对肾细胞癌患者的医疗资源利用（HRU）了解甚少。目的：本研究的目的是描述RCC患者和非难治性慢性咳嗽（non-RCC）患者的HRU和相关费用。方法：前瞻性地从法国6个中心招募慢性咳嗽患者。6个月时，将患者分为有肾细胞癌或无肾细胞癌。利用法国国家健康保险数据库（SNDS）进行回顾性分析，以确定纳入研究地点前一年和纳入研究地点后一年的医疗保健利用情况。结果：共纳入68例患者。其中32例（47%）为肾细胞癌。除了咳嗽持续时间（无RCC组56.8±59.5个月vs. RCC组139.3±123.8个月，p = 0.002）外，两组临床数据无差异。在纳入前1年内，两组在药物分配方面没有差异。在纳入后的1年期间，RCC患者接受阿片类药物和阿米替林至少一次配剂的比例明显高于未接受RCC的患者（阿片类药物8人（25%）对2人（6%），p = 0.038；阿米替林14人（44%）对3人（8%），p = 0.0015）。在纳入后的1年内，与没有RCC的患者相比，有更多的RCC患者接受了语言病理学家的访问（14例（44%）对10例（28%），p = 0.21）。纳入前12个月内的总成本，无RCC患者为3,878欧元（2,498 - 5,755欧元），有RCC患者为5,159欧元（3,426 - 7,138欧元），但差异不显著。纳入后的1年期间没有发生变化。结论：RCC的医疗保健利用率高，成本高。

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

Lung 医学-呼吸系统

CiteScore

9.10

自引率

10.00%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： Lung publishes original articles, reviews and editorials on all aspects of the healthy and diseased lungs, of the airways, and of breathing. Epidemiological, clinical, pathophysiological, biochemical, and pharmacological studies fall within the scope of the journal. Case reports, short communications and technical notes can be accepted if they are of particular interest.