Multiple Sclerosis in the UK
- 249 Downloads
Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic condition that affects quality of life (QOL), leads to disability and requires ongoing care inputs. Few studies have examined the impact of QOL, disability and demographic characteristics on treatment costs.
Objective: To investigate the links between service use, costs, QOL and disability for people with MS.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in people with MS who were members of the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. A questionnaire, consisting of sociodemographic questions, the Client Service Receipt Inventory, EQ-5D and Guy’s Neurological Disability Scale (GNDS), was sent to 4000 members of the Society. Service and lost employment costs were calculated. Regression models were developed to identify the participant characteristics that were associated with costs, QOL and disability. All costs are presented in year 2006–7 values.
Results: Questionnaires were returned by 1942 members (48.9%). The mean (SD) EQ-5D QOL score was 0.41 (0.34), whilst the GNDS disability score was 20.8 (8.9). The mean (SD) service cost over the preceding 6 months was £8397 (£10 404), and most of this (71.6%) was due to informal care. Only a small amount of cost (8.1%) was due to the use of disease-modifying drugs and drugs for spasticity. Lost employment costs amounted to a mean of £4240. Higher costs were associated with higher levels of disability and lower levels of health-related QOL.
Conclusions: This study showed that MS participants had high levels of service use, and that QOL was low in comparison with other conditions. There were significant associations between costs, QOL and disability.
- 1.Blumhardt L, Wood C. The economics of multiple sclerosis: a cost of illness study. Br J Med Econ 1996; 10: 99–118Google Scholar
- 2.Holmes J, Madgwick T, Bates D. The cost of multiple sclerosis. Br J Med Econ 1995; 8: 181–93Google Scholar
- 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, 2000Google Scholar
- 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: 239–59Google Scholar
- 10.Beecham J, Knapp M. Costing psychiatric interventions. In: Thornicroft G, editor. Measuring mental health needs. 2nd ed. London: Gaskell, 2001Google Scholar
- 11.Williams A. The role of the EuroQoL instrument in QALY calculations. York: Centre for Health Economics, University of York, 1995Google Scholar
- 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, 1995Google Scholar
- 15.Curtis L, Netten A. Unit costs of health and social care. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent, 2004Google Scholar
- 16.Netten A, Curtis L. Unit costs of health and social care. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent, 2002Google Scholar
- 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, 2005Google Scholar
- 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, 2007Google Scholar
- 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: 56–60Google Scholar
- 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, 1999Google Scholar