Abstract
The aim of this paper is to specify the cost of treatment and care for people with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in the Czech Republic and also with a view to the future. Data availability is evaluated as well as the quality of cost comparison with other developed countries. Data for the Czech Republic will include data from the health insurance company regarding medicines and treatment, as well as a selected home caring for people with dementia and, ultimately, the Social Security Administration. The basic methods include an analysis of data from publicly available sources, direct interviews with the representatives of nursing homes caring for people with dementia and the representative of the Social Security Administration of the Czech Republic. Items will be specified within the category of direct costs. For the study, the indirect costs related to the loss of patient as well as caring person productivity are not considered. Costs for treatment and care are based from the data on 4162 patients, the costs of a bed from data on 391 beds in homes for the elderly. The average annual cost per patient with AD in the Czech Republic was calculated and came to the amount of 12,783 EUR. These items include outpatient care, inpatient care in a medical facility, inpatient care in homes and medications. In terms of share of these items on the direct costs, the largest item are services provided by special homes which contributes to the direct costs by 94 %, medications create 1 % and treatment (both outpatient and inpatient) 5 %. In the case of home care the total costs are lower at 4698 EUR. The Czech Republic as well as other developed countries are faced with the problem of unified accounting cost of people suffering from Alzheimer’s disease. This then causes the calculation of the economic burden to be very difficult and indicative values.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Pidrman V (2007) Dementia. Grada Publishing, Prague
Alzheimer´s Disease International (2016) http://www.alz.co.uk/. Accessed 26 April 2016
Czech Alzheimer Society (CAS) (2015) http://www.alzheimer.cz/. Accessed 26 April 2016
Maresova P, Mohleska H, Kuca K (2015) Social and family load of Alzheimer’s disease. Appl Econ. doi:10.1080/00036846.2015.1111986
Mohelska H, Maresova P, Valis M, Kuca K (2015) Alzheimer’s disease and its treatment costs: Case Study in the Czech Republic. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat 11:2349–2354. doi:10.2147/NDT.S87503
Maresova P, Mohelska H, Dolejs J, Kuca K (2015) Socio-economic aspects of Alzheimer’s disease. Curr Alzheimer Res 12(9):903–911
Allegri RF, Butman J, Arizaga RL et al (2007) Economic impact of dementia in developing countries: an evaluation of costs of Alzheimer-type dementia in Argentina. Int Psychogeriatr 19:705–718
Wang G, Cheng Q, Zhang S et al (2008) Economic impact of de-mentia in developing countries: an evaluation of Alzheimer-type dementia in Shanghai, China. J Alzheimer Dis 15:109–115
Mesterton et al (2010) Cross sectional observational study on the societal costs of Alzheimer’s disease. Curr Alzheimer Res 7(4):358–367
Lamb HM, Goa KL (2001) Rivastigmine. A pharmacoeconomic re-view of its use in Alzheimer’s disease. Pharmacoeconomics 19:303–318
Wimo A (2004) Cost effectiveness of cholinesterase inhibitors in the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease: a review with methodologi-cal considerations. Drugs Aging 21:279–295
Herrmann N, Lanctôt KL, Sambrook R et al (2006) The contribu-tion of neuropsychiatric symptoms to the cost of dementia care. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 21:972–976
Castro D, Dillon C, Machnicki G, Allegri R (2010) The economic cost of Alzheimer’s disease: family or public-health burden? Dement Neuropsychol 4:262–267
Rice DP, Fox PJ, Max W et al (1993) The economic burden of Alzheimer’s disease care. Health Aff (Millwood) 12:164–176
Dodel et al (2015) Determinants of societal costs in Alzheimer’s disease: GERAS study baseline results. Alzheimer’s Dement 11(2015):933–945
Bloom et al (2003) Cost of illness of Alzheimer’s disease: How useful are current estimates? The Gerontologist 43(2):158–164
Drummond MF, O´Brien BJ (2005) Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford University, New York
The State Institute for Drug Control (SUKL) (2012). Evaluation of the development of distribution selected group of medicines. State Institute for Drug Control. http://www.sukl.cz/hodnoceni-vyvoje-distribuce-vybrane-skupiny-lecivych-9. Accessed 26 April 2016
Czech Statisical Office (CSO) (2014) Ageing population according to the results of the CSO projection. http://www.demografie.info/?cz_detail_clanku&artclID. Accessed 26 April 2016
Gervès Ch, Chauvin P, Bellanger MM (2014) Evaluation of full costs of care for patients with Alzheimer’s disease in France: the predominant role of informal care. Health Policy 116(1):114–122
Schwarzkopf L, Menn P, Kunz S et al (2011) Costs of care for dementia patients in community setting: an analysis for mild and moderate disease stage. Value Health 14(6):827–835. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2011.04.005
Travnickova J(2013). Economics and management in health care: 3rd edition of Proceedings of the student scientific conference organized by the Department of Biomedical Technology: Kladno, p 205–212
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the project Excellence 2015 (University of Hradec Kralove, Faculty of Informatics and Management) and Economics and Managerial aspects of processes in Biomedicine.
Author contribution statement
PM and VZ equally contributed to the drafting, analyses and final version of the whole manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests to declare.
Availability of data and materials
All the data and materials in this manuscript will be shared.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Marešová, P., Zahálková, V. The economic burden of the care and treatment for people with Alzheimer’s disease: the outlook for the Czech Republic. Neurol Sci 37, 1917–1922 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-016-2679-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-016-2679-6