| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rheumatology 2001; 40: 961-964
© 2001 British Society for Rheumatology
Editorial |
Medical therapy for rheumatoid arthritis—value for money?
Rheumatic Diseases Unit, Western General Hospital, University of Edinburgh, Crewe Road, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK
The economic burden of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is considerable and has been well documented [1–4]. The cost of managing the disease approximates to that of treating ischaemic heart disease [1] and several studies have suggested that the direct costs of treating patients with RA are two to three times higher than age- and sex-matched subjects without arthritis [3–5]. In addition, the cost of treating comorbidity is also higher in patients with RA than in non-RA controls [5]. In England, the total economic impact of RA has been estimated to be £1.256 billion, over half of which is accounted for by loss of earnings [6]. In-patient and long-term institutional care account for over 50% of the direct medical cost, while the cost of drugs, including monitoring and toxicity management, accounts for only about 15%. A similar distribution
References
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  A Kavanaugh Health economics: implications for novel antirheumatic therapies Ann Rheum Dis, November 1, 2005; 64(suppl_4): iv65 - iv69. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Brennan, N. Bansback, A. Reynolds, and P. Conway Modelling the cost-effectiveness of etanercept in adults with rheumatoid arthritis in the UK Rheumatology, January 1, 2004; 43(1): 62 - 72. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|