Economics – Page 2 – American ME and CFS Society

Cost-effectiveness of Interventions for Chronic Fatigue Syndrome or Myalgic Encephalomyelitis: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations

Abstract:

Introduction: Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) has profound quality of life and economic consequences for individuals, their family, formal services and wider society. Little is known about which therapeutic interventions are more cost-effective.

Objective: A systematic review was carried out to identify and critically appraise the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of CFS/ME interventions.

Methods: The review protocol was prespecified (PROSPERO: CRD42018118731). Searches were carried out across two databases-MEDLINE (1946-2020) and EMBASE (1974-2020). Additional studies were identified by searching reference lists. Only peer-reviewed journal articles of full economic evaluations examining CFS/ME interventions were included. Trial- and/or model-based economic evaluations were eligible. Data extraction and screening were carried out independently by two reviewers. The methodological quality of the economic evaluation and trial were assessed using the Consensus Health Economic Criteria checklist (CHEC-list) and Risk of Bias-2 (RoB-2) tool, respectively. A narrative synthesis was used to summarise the economic evidence for interventions for adults and children in primary and secondary care settings.

Results: Ten economic evaluations, all based on data derived from randomised controlled trials, met our eligibility criteria. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) was evaluated across five studies, making it the most commonly evaluated intervention. There was evidence from three trials to support CBT as a cost-effective treatment option for adults; however, findings on CBT were not uniform, suggesting that cost-effectiveness may be context-specific. A wide array of other interventions were evaluated in adults, including limited evidence from two trials supporting the cost effectiveness of graded exercise therapy (GET). Just one study assessed intervention options for children. Our review highlighted the importance of informal care costs and productivity losses in the evaluation of CFS/ME interventions.

Conclusions: We identified a limited patchwork of evidence on the cost-effectiveness of interventions for CFS/ME. Evidence supports CBT as a cost-effective treatment option for adults; however, cost-effectiveness may depend on the duration and frequency of sessions. Limited evidence supports the cost effectiveness of GET. Key weaknesses in the literature included small sample sizes and short duration of follow-up. Further research is needed on pharmacological interventions and therapies for children.

Source: Cochrane M, Mitchell E, Hollingworth W, Crawley E, Trépel D. Cost-effectiveness of Interventions for Chronic Fatigue Syndrome or Myalgic Encephalomyelitis: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2021 Mar 1:1–14. doi: 10.1007/s40258-021-00635-7. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 33646528; PMCID: PMC7917957. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7917957/ (Full text)

The Economic Impacts of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome in an Australian Cohort

Abstract:

Objectives: This study aims to estimate direct and indirect health economic costs associated with government and out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditure based on health care service utilization and lost income of participants and carers, as reported by Australian Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) patient survey participants.

Design: A cost of illness study was conducted to estimate Australian cost data for individuals with a ME/CFS diagnosis as determined by the Canadian Consensus Criteria (CCC), International Consensus Criteria (ICC), and the 1994 CDC Criteria (Fukuda).

Setting and participants: Survey participants identified from a research registry database provided self-report of expenditure associated with ME/CFS related healthcare across a 1-month timeframe between 2017 and 2019.

Main outcome measures: ME/CFS related direct annual government health care costs, OOP health expenditure costs, indirect costs associated with lost income and health care service use patterns.

Results: The mean annual cost of health care related expenditure and associated income loss among survey participants meeting diagnostic criteria for ME/CFS was estimated at $14.5 billion. For direct OOP and Government health care expenditure, high average costs were related to medical practitioner attendance, diagnostics, natural medicines, and device expenditure, with an average attendance of 10.6 referred attendances per annum and 12.1 GP visits per annum related specifically to managing ME/CFS.

Conclusions: The economic impacts of ME/CFS in Australia are significant. Improved understanding of the illness pathology, diagnosis, and management, may reduce costs, improve patient prognosis and decrease the burden of ME/CFS in Australia.

Source: Close S, Marshall-Gradisnik S, Byrnes J, Smith P, Nghiem S, Staines D. The Economic Impacts of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome in an Australian Cohort. Front Public Health. 2020 Aug 21;8:420. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00420. PMID: 32974259; PMCID: PMC7472917. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00420/full (Full text)

Documenting Disability in Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS)

Abstract:

Background: According to the 2015 National Academy of Medicine report, myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) “is a serious, chronic, complex, and systemic disease that frequently and dramatically limits the activities of affected patients.” ME/CFS affects between 1 and 2.5 million Americans, leaving as many as 75% unable to work due to physical, cognitive and functional impairment. Unfortunately, many doctors and lawyers lack the knowledge of how to properly document an ME/CFS disability claim, leaving patients unable to access disability benefits.

Objective: The goal of this article is to summarize the approaches used by experienced clinicians and lawyers in successful ME/CFS disability claims.

Methods: The authors reviewed the types of US disability insurance programs and the evidence commonly required by these programs to demonstrate ME/CFS disability.

Results: This article summarizes the range of methods used in successful US disability claims, which include documentation of the functional impact of post-exertional malaise and the use of methods that provide objective evidence of impairment.

Conclusions: Medical providers and lawyers can use these tested methods to obtaining disability benefits for people with ME/CFS. Physical therapists, occupational therapists, and other specialists play an important role in providing objective evidence for ME/CFS disability claims.

Source: Podell R, Dimmock ME, Comerford BB. Documenting disability in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jun 16]. Work. 2020;10.3233/WOR-203178. doi:10.3233/WOR-203178 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32568153/

Counting The Cost – Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis

Foreword:

For the past 20 years there has been extensive argument in the UK about the causes and diagnostic criteria for this illness. For some considerable time, the conventional wisdom was that this illness was purely psychological in origin.

The World Health Organisation has clearly classified CFS/ME as a neurological disease in its International Classification of Diseases (ICD), section G93.3.

Despite this clarity, there is still a lack of universal agreement about CFS/ ME in the UK. This has led to a paralysis of research into both the biomedical causes of and treatments for CFS/ME, and the research that has been done has focused primarily on the psychological side.

The time has come for a proper research strategy for CFS/ME, looking at both bio-medical causes and treatments. In order to commence a dialogue with government and other interested parties, it is essential for everyone to be on the same page. To achieve that degree of agreement will be a challenge, but I believe the first step in that process is to start a new public conversation about this horrible illness.

The purpose of this report by the health think tank 2020health, sponsored by the Optimum Health Clinic, is to do just that. Nothing concentrates the mind like money. This is the first cost of illness study of CFS/ME to the UK economy combining direct costs (including primary and secondary care contacts, prescription and over the counter

medications, and complimentary treatments) and indirect costs (including work productivity losses, informal care and welfare payments). The results are staggering.

In commissioning this report, our hope is that we can:

* Demonstrate clearly all the costs of CFS/ME to the UK economy;

* Use this report to start a new public conversation about the illness;

* Start a dialogue with all interested parties to create a new strategy to research the bio-medical causes of and treatments for CFS/ME

You can read the full report HERE.

Economic evaluation of multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment versus cognitive behavioural therapy for patients with chronic fatigue syndrome: A randomized controlled trial

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: A multi-centre RCT has shown that multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment (MRT) is more effective in reducing fatigue over the long-term in comparison with cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), but evidence on its cost-effectiveness is lacking.

AIM: To compare the cost-effectiveness of MRT versus CBT for patients with CFS from a societal perspective.

METHODS: A multi-centre randomized controlled trial comparing MRT with CBT was conducted among 122 patients with CFS diagnosed using the 1994 criteria of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and aged between 18 and 60 years. The societal costs (healthcare costs, patient and family costs, and costs for loss of productivity), fatigue severity, quality of life, quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), and cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were measured over a follow-up period of one year. The main outcome of the cost-effectiveness analysis was fatigue measured by the Checklist Individual Strength (CIS). The main outcome of the cost-utility analysis was the QALY based on the EuroQol-5D-3L utilities. Sensitivity analyses were performed, and uncertainty was calculated using the cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and cost-effectiveness planes.

RESULTS: The data of 109 patients (57 MRT and 52 CBT) were analyzed. MRT was significantly more effective in reducing fatigue at 52 weeks. The mean difference in QALY between the treatments was not significant (0.09, 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.19). The total societal costs were significantly higher for patients allocated to MRT (a difference of €5,389, 95% CI: 2,488 to 8,091). MRT has a high probability of being the most cost effective, using fatigue as the primary outcome. The ICER is €856 per unit of the CIS fatigue subscale. The results of the cost-utility analysis, using the QALY, indicate that the CBT had a higher likelihood of being more cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS: The probability of being more cost-effective is higher for MRT when using fatigue as primary outcome variable. Using QALY as the primary outcome, CBT has the highest probability of being more cost-effective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN77567702.

Source: Vos-Vromans D, Evers S, Huijnen I, Köke A, Hitters M, Rijnders N, Pont M, Knottnerus A, Smeets R.Economic evaluation of multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment versus cognitive behavioural therapy for patients with chronic fatigue syndrome: A randomized controlled trial. PLoS One. 2017 Jun 2;12(6):e0177260. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177260. ECollection 2017. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2857498

Chronic fatigue syndrome patients had reduced activity in brain’s ‘reward center’

Chronic fatigue syndrome, a medical disorder characterized by extreme and ongoing fatigue with no other diagnosed cause, remains poorly understood despite decades of scientific study. Although researchers estimate that more than 1 million Americans are affected by this condition, the cause for chronic fatigue syndrome, a definitive way to diagnose it, and even its very existence remain in question. In a new study, researchers have found differing brain responses in people with this condition compared to healthy controls, suggesting an association between a biologic functional response and chronic fatigue syndrome.

The findings show that patients with chronic fatigue syndrome have decreased activation of an area of the brain known as the basal ganglia in response to reward. Additionally, the extent of this lowered activation was associated with each patient’s measured level of fatigue. The basal ganglia are at the base of the brain and are associated with a variety of functions, including motor activity and motivation. Diseases affecting basal ganglia are often associated with fatigue. These results shed more light on this mysterious condition, information that researchers hope may eventually lead to better treatments for chronic fatigue syndrome.

The study was conducted by Elizabeth R. Unger, James F. Jones, and Hao Tian of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Andrew H. Miller and Daniel F. Drake of Emory University School of Medicine, and Giuseppe Pagnoni of the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia. An abstract of their study entitled, “Decreased Basal Ganglia Activation in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Subjects is Associated with Increased Fatigue,” will be discussed at the meeting Experimental Biology 2012, being held April 21-25 at the San Diego Convention Center. The abstract is sponsored by the American Society for Investigative Pathology (ASIP), one of six scientific societies sponsoring the conference which last year attracted some 14,000 attendees.

More Fatigue, Less Activation

Dr. Unger says that she and her colleagues became curious about the role of the basal ganglia after previous studies by collaborators at Emory University showed that patients treated with interferon alpha, a common treatment for chronic hepatitis C and several other conditions, often experienced extreme fatigue. Further investigation into this phenomenon showed that basal ganglia activity decreased in patients who received this immune therapy. Since the fatigue induced by interferon alpha shares many characteristics with chronic fatigue syndrome, Unger and her colleagues decided to investigate whether the basal ganglia were also affected in this disorder.

The researchers recruited 18 patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, as well as 41 healthy volunteers with no symptoms of CFS. Each study participant underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging, a brain scan technique that measures activity in various parts of the brain by blood flow, while they played a simple card game meant to stimulate feelings of reward. The participants were each told that they’d win a small amount of money if they correctly guessed whether a preselected card was red or black. After making their choice, they were presented with the card while researchers measured blood flow to the basal ganglia during winning and losing hands.

The researchers showed that patients with chronic fatigue syndrome experienced significantly less change in basal ganglia blood flow between winning and losing than the healthy volunteers. When the researchers looked at scores for the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, a survey often used to document fatigue for chronic fatigue syndrome and various other conditions, they also found that the extent of a patient’s fatigue was tightly tied with the change in brain activity between winning and losing. Those with the most fatigue had the smallest change.

Results Suggest Role of Inflammation

Unger notes that the findings add to our understanding of biological factors that may play a role in chronic fatigue syndrome. “Many patients with chronic fatigue syndrome encounter a lot of skepticism about their illness,” she says. “They have difficulty getting their friends, colleagues, coworkers, and even some physicians to understand their illness. These results provide another clue into the biology of chronic fatigue syndrome.”

The study also suggests some areas of further research that could help scientists develop treatments for this condition in the future, she adds. Since the basal ganglia use the chemical dopamine as their major neurotransmitter, dopamine metabolism may play an important role in understanding and changing the course of this illness. Similarly, the difference in basal ganglia activation between the patients and healthy volunteers may be caused by inflammation, a factor now recognized as pivotal in a variety of conditions, ranging from heart disease to cancer.

Estimates from the CDC suggest that annual medical costs associated with chronic fatigue syndrome total about $14 billion in the United States. Annual losses to productivity because of lost work time range between $9 and $37 billion, with costs to individual households ranging between $8,000 and $20,000 per year.

Source: Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB). (2012, April 24). Chronic fatigue syndrome patients had reduced activity in brain’s ‘reward center’. ScienceDaily. Retrieved March 4, 2017 from https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120424142109.htm

Long-term economic evaluation of cognitive-behavioural group treatment versus enhanced usual care for functional somatic syndromes

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: Patients with functional somatic syndromes (FSS) such as fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome have a poor outcome and can incur high healthcare and societal costs. We aimed to compare the medium-term (16 months) cost-effectiveness and the long-term (40 months) economic outcomes of a bespoke cognitive-behavioural group treatment (STreSS) with that of enhanced usual care (EUC).

METHODS: We obtained complete data on healthcare and indirect costs (i.e. labour marked-related and health-related benefits) from public registries for 120 participants from a randomised controlled trial. Costs were calculated as per capita public expenses in 2010 €. QALYs gained were estimated from the SF-6D. We conducted a medium-term cost-effectiveness analysis and a long-term cost-minimization analysis from both a healthcare (i.e. direct cost) and a societal (i.e. total cost) perspective.

RESULTS: In the medium term, the probability that STreSS was cost-effective at thresholds of 25,000 to 35,000 € per QALY was 93-95% from a healthcare perspective, but only 50-55% from a societal perspective. In the long term, however, STreSS was associated with increasing savings in indirect costs, mainly due to a greater number of patients self-supporting. When combined with stable long-term reductions in healthcare expenditures, there were total cost savings of 7184 € (95% CI 2271 to 12,096, p=0.004) during the third year after treatment.

CONCLUSION: STreSS treatment costs an average of 1545 €. This cost was more than offset by subsequent savings in direct and indirect costs. Implementation could both improve patient outcomes and reduce costs.

Source: Schröder A, Ørnbøl E, Jensen JS, Sharpe M, Fink P. Long-term economic evaluation of cognitive-behavioural group treatment versus enhanced usual care for functional somatic syndromes. J Psychosom Res. 2017 Mar;94:73-81. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2017.01.005. Epub 2017 Jan 10. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28183406

Cost-effectiveness of counselling, graded-exercise and usual care for chronic fatigue: evidence from a randomised trial in primary care

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Fatigue is common and has been shown to result in high economic costs to society. The aim of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness of two active therapies, graded-exercise (GET) and counselling (COUN) with usual care plus a self-help booklet (BUC) for people presenting with chronic fatigue.

METHODS: A randomised controlled trial was conducted with participants consulting for fatigue of over three months’ duration recruited from 31 general practices in South East England and allocated to one of three arms. Outcomes and use of services were assessed at 6-month follow-up. The main outcome measure used in the economic evaluation was clinically significant improvements in fatigue, measured using the Chalder fatigue scale. Cost-effectiveness was assessed using the net-benefit approach and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

RESULTS: Full economic and outcome data at six months were available for 163 participants; GET = 51, COUN = 58 and BUC = 54. Those receiving the active therapies (GET and COUN) had more contacts with care professionals and therefore higher costs, these differences being statistically significant. COUN was more expensive and less effective than the other two therapies. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of GET compared to BUC was equal to £987 per unit of clinically significant improvement. However, there was much uncertainty around this result.

CONCLUSION: This study does not provide a clear recommendation about which therapeutic option to adopt, based on efficiency, for patients with chronic fatigue. It suggests that COUN is not cost-effective, but it is unclear whether GET represents value for money compared to BUC.

Clinical Trial Registration number at ISRCTN register: 72136156.

Source: Sabes-Figuera R, McCrone P, Hurley M, King M, Donaldson AN, Ridsdale L. Cost-effectiveness of counselling, graded-exercise and usual care for chronic fatigue: evidence from a randomised trial in primary care. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Aug 20;12:264. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-264. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3480915/ (Full article)

Adaptive pacing, cognitive behaviour therapy, graded exercise, and specialist medical care for chronic fatigue syndrome: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: The PACE trial compared the effectiveness of adding adaptive pacing therapy (APT), cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT), or graded exercise therapy (GET), to specialist medical care (SMC) for patients with chronic fatigue syndrome. This paper reports the relative cost-effectiveness of these treatments in terms of quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and improvements in fatigue and physical function.

METHODS: Resource use was measured and costs calculated. Healthcare and societal costs (healthcare plus lost production and unpaid informal care) were combined with QALYs gained, and changes in fatigue and disability; incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were computed.

RESULTS: SMC patients had significantly lower healthcare costs than those receiving APT, CBT and GET. If society is willing to value a QALY at £30,000 there is a 62.7% likelihood that CBT is the most cost-effective therapy, a 26.8% likelihood that GET is most cost effective, 2.6% that APT is most cost-effective and 7.9% that SMC alone is most cost-effective. Compared to SMC alone, the incremental healthcare cost per QALY was £18,374 for CBT, £23,615 for GET and £55,235 for APT. From a societal perspective CBT has a 59.5% likelihood of being the most cost-effective, GET 34.8%, APT 0.2% and SMC alone 5.5%. CBT and GET dominated SMC, while APT had a cost per QALY of £127,047. ICERs using reductions in fatigue and disability as outcomes largely mirrored these findings.

CONCLUSIONS: Comparing the four treatments using a health care perspective, CBT had the greatest probability of being the most cost-effective followed by GET. APT had a lower probability of being the most cost-effective option than SMC alone. The relative cost-effectiveness was even greater from a societal perspective as additional cost savings due to reduced need for informal care were likely.

Source: McCrone P, Sharpe M, Chalder T, Knapp M, Johnson AL, Goldsmith KA, White PD. Adaptive pacing, cognitive behaviour therapy, graded exercise, and specialist medical care for chronic fatigue syndrome: a cost-effectiveness analysis. PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e40808. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0040808. Epub 2012 Aug 1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3411573/ (Full article)

The impact of CFS/ME on employment and productivity in the UK: a cross-sectional study based on the CFS/ME national outcomes database

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Few studies have investigated factors associated with discontinuation of employment in patients with CFS/ME or quantified its impact on productivity.

METHODS: We used patient-level data from five NHS CFS/ME services during the period 01/04/2006-31/03/2010 collated in the UK CFS/ME National Outcomes Database. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with discontinuation of employment. We estimated UK-wide productivity costs using patient-level data on duration of illness before assessment by a CFS/ME service, duration of unemployment, age, sex and numbers of patients, in conjunction with Office for National Statistics income and population data.

RESULTS: Data were available for 2,170 patients, of whom 1,669 (76.9%) were women. Current employment status was recorded for 1,991 patients (91.8%), of whom 811 patients (40.7%) were currently employed and 998 (50.1%) had discontinued their employment “because of fatigue-related symptoms”. Older age, male sex, disability, fatigue, pain, and duration of illness were associated with cessation of employment. In a multivariable model, age, male sex, and disability remained as independent predictors. Total productivity costs among the 2,170 patients due to discontinuation of employment in the years preceding assessment by a specialist CFS/ME service (median duration of illness=36 months) were £49.2 million. Our sample was equivalent to 4,424 UK adults accessing specialist services each year, representing productivity costs to the UK economy of £102.2 million. Sensitivity analyses suggested a range between £75.5-£128.9 million.

CONCLUSIONS: CFS/ME incurs huge productivity costs amongst the small fraction of adults with CFS/ME who access specialist services.

Source: Collin SM, Crawley E, May MT, Sterne JA, Hollingworth W; UK CFS/ME National Outcomes Database. Collaborators (8) The impact of CFS/ME on employment and productivity in the UK: a cross-sectional study based on the CFS/ME national outcomes database. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011 Sep 15;11:217. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-217. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3184626/ (Full article)