4.2 Article

The burden of adult asthma in Finland: impact of disease severity and eosinophil count on health care resource utilization

Journal

JOURNAL OF ASTHMA
Volume 57, Issue 10, Pages 1092-1102

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/02770903.2019.1633664

Keywords

Severe asthma; severe eosinophilic asthma; health care costs; mortality; health care resource utilization

Funding

  1. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) [HO-17-17558]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To describe health care resource utilization (HCRU) and associated costs in adult patients referred for specialist asthma care in Southwest Finland, by disease severity and blood eosinophil count (BEC). Methods: This non-interventional, retrospective registry study (GSK ID: HO-17-17558) utilized data from patients >18 years of age on the hospital register of the Hospital District of Southwest Finland. Data extraction was from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2015; the index date was the first hospital visit within this period with an International Classification of Diseases-10 diagnosis code for asthma or acute severe asthma. Patients were categorized by asthma severity (based on medication use) and BEC (<300 or >= 300 cells/mu L). Total and asthma-related HCRU and estimated costs were recorded the year following index and for calendar years 2004-2015. Results: Overall, 14,398 patients were included; 388 had severe asthma at index. BEC was available for 3781 patients; 1434 had a BEC >= 300 cells/mu L and 2347 had a BEC <300 cells/mu L. A total of 1241 patients had severe asthma; 270 patients had severe eosinophilic asthma (severe asthma and a BEC >= 300 cells/mu L). Patients with severe versus non-severe asthma had higher total- and asthma-related outpatient visits, inpatient days, emergency room visits and costs per patient year; those with BEC >= 300 cells/mu L versus Conclusion: This study demonstrated a substantial burden associated with severe and/or eosinophilic asthma for adults in Finland.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available