GREGA, Dominik and Jozef KOLÁŘ. The Economic Burden of Biological Drugs in Rheumatoid Arthritis Treatment. Value in Health Regional Issues. AMSTERDAM: Elsevier, 2024, vol. 40, March, p. 13-18. ISSN 2212-1099. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vhri.2023.10.001.
Other formats:   BibTeX LaTeX RIS
Basic information
Original name The Economic Burden of Biological Drugs in Rheumatoid Arthritis Treatment
Authors GREGA, Dominik (703 Slovakia, guarantor, belonging to the institution) and Jozef KOLÁŘ (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution).
Edition Value in Health Regional Issues, AMSTERDAM, Elsevier, 2024, 2212-1099.
Other information
Original language English
Type of outcome Article in a journal
Field of Study 30104 Pharmacology and pharmacy
Country of publisher Netherlands
Confidentiality degree is not subject to a state or trade secret
WWW URL
Impact factor Impact factor: 2.000 in 2022
Organization unit Faculty of Pharmacy
Doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vhri.2023.10.001
UT WoS 001117176500001
Keywords in English direct costs; elasticity factor; friction period; indirect costs; loss of productivity.
Tags rivok, ÚAF
Tags International impact, Reviewed
Changed by Changed by: JUDr. Sabina Krejčiříková, učo 383857. Changed: 15/1/2024 09:30.
Abstract
Objectives: This article aimed to count and compare treatment's direct (only biological drugs) and indirect (loss of productivity) costs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis from 2019 to 2021.Methods: The friction cost approach was used to establish indirect costs. Elasticity factor values and friction period for the Slovak Republic from 2019 to 2021 were determined. Direct drug costs were calculated based on average prices from 2019 to 2021 and the number of dispensed medication packages.Results: The average productivity loss reached euro2984.54 in 2019, euro3338.46 in 2020, and euro3154.01 in 2021. Total indirect costs include productivity loss and sick pay, and from 2019 to 2021 came the values of euro8.4 million, euro10.1 million, and euro8.1 million, respectively. Conclusions: Indirect costs were almost 2.5 to 3 times lower than the biological and targeted treatment costs.
PrintDisplayed: 10/7/2024 20:41