Differences in resource use and costs of dementia care between European countries: Baseline data from the ictus study

Abstract

Objectives

This study aimed to estimate the costs of formal and informal care of patients with Alzheimer's disease, to compare care costs across European countries and identify potential differences in cost patterns between countries and regions.

Setting

The ICTUS study is a prospective, naturalistic observational study conducted in specialised memory clinics in 12 European countries. In total, 1385 patients diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease were enrolled at baseline. All subjects had a reliable informant (primary caregiver) and informed consent was obtained from patients or their primary caregiver.

Main outcome measures

Resource utilization data was captured with the RUD Lite (Resource Utilization in Dementia) instrument and caregiver burden with the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI). Patient disease severity was measured with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog), Katz’ index (PADL), Instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) scale and Neuropsychiatric inventory (NPI).

Results

The mean annual cost of care per patient was estimated to €7,820 (95% CI: €7,194–€8,446), whereof 54% were costs of informal care, 16% direct medical costs and 30% community care costs. There were substantial differences in total resource utilization and also in the balance between formal and informal care between Northern, Western and Southern Europe. PADL scores were strongly associated with formal care costs while IADL scores correlated strongly with informal care costs.

Conclusions

Costs of Alzheimer's Disease are high across European countries. Activities of daily living is an important determinant of care costs. Formal care service use is lower and informal care higher in Southern Europe compared to Western and Northern Europe. Differences in resource utilization patterns are important to consider in international studies of dementia care costs as well as in economic evaluations of new treatments for dementia.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. 1.

    Wimo, A., L. Jonsson, and B. Winblad, An estimate of the worldwide prevalence and direct costs of dementia in 2003. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord, 2006. 21(3): p. 175–181.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Wimo, A., L. Jönsson, and B. Winblad, An estimate of the total worldwide societal costs of dementia in 2005. Alzheimer's and Dementia, 2007. 3: p. 81–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Jonsson, L., et al., Determinants of costs of care for patients with Alzheimer's disease. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2006. 21(5): p. 449–459.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Loveman, E., et al., The clinical and cost-effectiveness of donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine and memantine for Alzheimer's disease. Health Technol Assess, 2006. 10(1): p. iii–iv, ix–xi, 1–160.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Jonsson, L. and A. Wimo, The cost of dementia in Europe: a review of the evidence, and methodological considerations. Pharmacoeconomics, 2009. 27(5): p. 391–403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    SBU, Behandling med östrogen. SBU Rapport nr 159. 2002, Statens beredning för medicinsk utvärdering (SBU): Stockholm.

  7. 7.

    Wimo, A., G. Ljunggren, and B. Winblad, Costs of dementia and dementia care: a review. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 1997. 12(8): p. 841–856.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Andrieu, S., et al., Predictive factors of acute hospitalization in 134 patients with Alzheimer's disease: a one year prospective study. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2002. 17(5): p. 422–426.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    McKhann, G., et al., Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease: report of the NINCDS-ADRDA Work Group under the auspices of Department of Health and Human Services Task Force on Alzheimer's Disease. Neurology, 1984. 34(7): p. 939–944.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Folstein, M.F., S.E. Folstein, and P.R. McHugh, “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 1975. 12(3): p. 189–198.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Wimo, A., et al., Evaluation of the resource utilization and caregiver time in Antidementia drug trials — a quantitative battery, in The Health Economis of dementia, A. Wimo, et al., Editors. 1998, John Wiley & Sons: London. p. 465–499.

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Wimo, A. and B. Winblad, Resource utilisation in dementia: RUD Lite. Brain Aging, 2003. 3: p. 48–59.

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Wimo, A. and G. Nordberg, Validity and reliability of assessments of time Comparisons of direct observations and estimates of time by the use of the resource utilization in dementia (RUD)-instrument. Arch Gerontol Geriatr, 2006.

  14. 14.

    Mohs, R.C., W.G. Rosen, and K.L. Davis, The Alzheimer's disease assessment scale: an instrument for assessing treatment efficacy. Psychopharmacol Bull, 1983. 19(3): p. 448–450.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Katz, S., et al., A standardized measure of biological and psychosocial function. JAMA, 1963. 185: p. 914–919.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Lawton, M.P. and E.M. Brody, Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist, 1969. 9(3): p. 179–186.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Cummings, J.L., et al., The Neuropsychiatric Inventory: comprehensive assessment of psychopathology in dementia. Neurology, 1994. 44(12): p. 2308–2314.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Zarit, S.H., K.E. Reever, and J. Bach-Peterson, Relatives of the impaired elderly: correlates of feelings of burden. Gerontologist, 1980. 20(6): p. 649–655.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Eurostat (2008). Economy and finance. Comparative price levels. [cited 24may2010]; Available from: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=tsier010.

  20. 20.

    Vägverket, Vägverkets samhällsekonomiska kalkylmodell. Ekonomisk teori och värderingar. 1997, Vägverket (Swedish Road Authority): Stockholm.

  21. 21.

    Hartigan, J.A., Clustering algorithms. Wiley series in probability and mathematical statistics; A Wiley publication in applied statistics. 1975, New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Sano, M., et al., The effects of galantamine treatment on caregiver time in Alzheimer's disease. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2003. 18(10): p. 942–950.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Feldman, H., et al., Efficacy of donepezil on maintenance of activities of daily living in patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease and the effect on caregiver burden. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2003. 51(6): p. 737–744.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Wimo, A., et al., Impact of donepezil treatment for Alzheimer's disease on caregiver time. Curr Med Res Opin, 2004. 20(8): p. 1221–1225.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Waldemar, G., et al., Tolerability of switching from donepezil to memantine treatment in patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2008. 23(9): p. 979–981.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Wimo A, Jönsson L, Zbrozek A. The Resource Utilization in Dementia (RUD) Instrument Is Valid for Assessing Informal Care Time in Community-Living Patients with Dementia. J Nutr Health Aging. 2010;14(8):685–690.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Dunn, G., et al., Describing, explaining or predicting mental health care costs: a guide to regression models. Methodological review. Br J Psychiatry, 2003. 183: p. 398–404.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anders Gustavsson.

Additional information

ON BEHALF OF THE ICTUS STUDY GROUP

ICTUS study group: B. Vellas (Toulouse), R.W. Jones (Bath), A. Burns (Manchester), R. Bullock (Swindon), A. Malick (Warwick), E. Salmon (Liege), G. Waldemar (Copenhagen), J.F. Dartigues (Bordeaux), F. Pasquier (Lille), J. Touchon (Montpellier), Ph. Robert (Nice), A.S. Rigaud (Paris), V. Camus (Tours), G. Stiens (Goettingen), L. Frölich (Mannheim), M. Tsolaki (Thessalonica), G. Frisoni (Brescia), G. Rodriguez (Genoa), A. Cherubini (Perugia), L. Spiru (Bucharest), M. Boada (Barcelona), A. Salva (Girona), E. Agéra-Morales (Cordoba), J.M. Ribera-Casado (Madrid), P.M. Lage (Pamplona), B. Winblad (Stockholm), D. Zekry (Geneva), P. Scheltens (Amsterdam), M. Olde-Rikkert (Nijmegen). Co-ordination: F. Cortes, C. Cantet, P.J. Ousset, C. Caillaud, E. Reynish

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gustavsson, A., Jonsson, L., Rapp, T. et al. Differences in resource use and costs of dementia care between European countries: Baseline data from the ictus study. J Nutr Health Aging 14, 648–654 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12603-010-0311-7

Download citation

Key words

  • Alzheimer
  • economics
  • cost of illness