Patients and methods: This cross-sectional study included 167 SLE patients (21 males, 146 females; mean age 38.2±9.8 years; range, 20 to 60 years) recruited from the outpatient Rheumatology and Nephrology clinics. Face-to-face interviews were conducted to record patients' socio- demographics (age, sex, ethnicity, marital status, and occupation) and SLE disease characteristics (system involvement, age onset, and presence of organ damage). Disease activity was assessed using the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index-2000 (SLEDAI-2K). Short form 36 (SF-36) was used to determine health-related quality of life (HRQoL) while Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire was used to assess the four domains of absenteeism, presenteeism, overall work productivity, and non-work related ADL impairment. Univariate analyses and multivariable regression analysis examined the association of demographic variables, SLE disease characteristics, and activity with reduced HRQoL and WPAI scores.
Results: The majority of the patients were Malays (59.3%), followed by Chinese (34.7%) and Indian (3.6%) patients. More than two-thirds of the patients reported some degree of impairment in their work productivity and ADL due to the disease. The absenteeism rate was 10.4% in the past one week and their indirect costs were 2,875.17 Malaysian ringgits (US $701.22) in the past seven days. Significant predictors of higher work productivity and ADL impairment scores were higher disease activity, more frequent SLE flares, lupus nephritis, and hematological involvement of SLE. Patients with higher work productivity and ADL impairment scores were also strongly associated with poor QoL. No ethnic disparities of work productivity and ADL impairment were found.
Conclusion: Systemic lupus erythematosus significantly affected the overall productivity in work and non-work related activity in our Malaysian multi-ethnic cohort and both impairments were significantly associated with poor QoL.
METHODS: Published literature, information from statistical bureaus, clinician surveys and extrapolation of selected data from the European Union were used to determine the socioeconomic costs of AR and urticaria.
RESULTS: Many patients in Asia suffer from perennial allergies and experience symptoms of AR and urticaria for up to 298 days per year. An estimate of the indirect costs of patients insufficiently treated for AR and urticaria amounts to USD 105.4 billion a year, which equates to USD 1,137-2,195 per patient due to absenteeism and presenteeism. Adherence to guideline-approved treatment can lead to estimated savings of up to USD 104 billion.
CONCLUSIONS: The current study suggests that within Asia, the socioeconomic impact of AR and urticaria is similar to that seen in the European Union in spite of the lower wages in Asia. This is due to the mainly perennial allergens prevailing in Asia, whereas the sensitization patterns observed in the European Union are dominated by seasonal exposure to pollen. These results underline the need for governmental initiatives to increase public awareness on the prevention and treatment of these and other allergic diseases as well as greater research funding and large-scale studies to reduce their growing socioeconomic burden in coming years.
METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among employees in two multinational banks in Malaysia between April and July 2019. Screening for migraine was conducted using the self-administered ID-Migraine™ questionnaire. Migraine-related disability (MIDAS) and headache frequency were recorded. Impact of migraine on work productivity and activities were evaluated using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire.
RESULTS: Of the 1268 employees who submitted complete responses, 47.2% (n = 598) were screened positive for migraine. Strikingly, the mean percent productivity loss at work (presenteeism) was almost 20-fold higher than the mean percent work time missed due to migraine (absenteeism) (39.1% versus 1.9%). The mean percent productivity loss in regular activity (activity impairment) and overall work productivity loss (work impairment) was 38.4% and 39.9%, respectively. It was also found that the costs related to presenteeism (MYR 5392.6) (US$1296) was 3.5-fold higher than absenteeism (MYR1,548.3) (US$370). Highest monetary loss related to presenteeism was reported in migraineurs with frequency of headache of above 3 days (MYR 25,691.2) (US$6176), whereas highest monetary loss related to absenteeism was reported in migraineurs with MIDAS grade IV (MYR 12,369.1) (US$2973). Only 30% of migraineurs of MIDAS grade IV reported taking prescribed medication. Notably, a vast majority (96%) of migraineurs who had three or lower episodes of migraine per month did not seek treatment.
CONCLUSION: The significant impact of migraine on work productivity and regular activity, appears to lead to substantial monetary loss attributed to not only absenteeism, but more importantly to presenteeism. This study also highlights the unmet needs in migraine management among employees in the banking sector.
METHODS: This study employed cross-sectional, self-reported survey methodology. We used the 6-item Kessler screening scale (K6) to assess psychological distress (cutoff score ≥ 13, range 0-24, with higher scores indicating greater psychological distress). Participants self-reported their perceptions of whether they had been bullied at work and how frequently this occurred. A multivariate logistic regression was conducted with ever bullying and never bullying as dichotomous categories.
RESULTS: There were a total of 5235 participants (62.3% female). Participant ages ranged from 18 to 85, mean ± standard deviation (M ± SD): 33.88 ± 8.83. A total of 2045 (39.1%) participants reported ever being bullied. Of these, 731 (14.0%) reported being subject to at least occasional bullying, while another 194 (3.7%) reported it as a common occurrence. Across all income strata, mean scores for psychological distress were significantly higher for ever bullied employees (M ± SD: 8.69 ± 4.83) compared to those never bullied (M ± SD: 5.75 ± 4.49). Regression analysis indicated significant associations (p
METHODS: Five specialist periodontal clinics in the Ministry of Health represented the public sector in providing clinical and cost data for this study. Newly-diagnosed periodontitis patients (N = 165) were recruited and followed up for one year of specialist periodontal care. Direct and indirect costs from the societal viewpoint were included in the cost analysis. They were measured in 2012 Ringgit Malaysia (MYR) and estimated from the societal perspective using activity-based and step-down costing methods, and substantiated by clinical pathways. Cost of dental equipment, consumables and labour (average treatment time) for each procedure was measured using activity-based costing method. Meanwhile, unit cost calculations for clinic administration, utilities and maintenance used step-down approach. Patient expenditures and absence from work were recorded via diary entries. The conversion from MYR to Euro was based on the 2012 rate (1€ = MYR4).
RESULTS: A total of 2900 procedures were provided, with an average cost of MYR 2820 (€705) per patient for the study year, and MYR 376 (€94) per outpatient visit. Out of this, 90% was contributed by provider cost and 10% by patient cost; 94% for direct cost and 4% for lost productivity. Treatment of aggressive periodontitis was significantly higher than for chronic periodontitis (t-test, P = 0.003). Higher costs were expended as disease severity increased (ANOVA, P = 0.022) and for patients requiring surgeries (ANOVA, P