This review analyzes the economic costs of HF in Asia. The availability and quality of studies on the burden of osteoporosis in Asia are very scarce. There is a need to encourage more quality cost of osteoporosis studies based on standardized methods to convince healthcare authorities in implementing appropriate strategies.
INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis fractures, especially hip fractures, impose large economic costs to governments and societies. This review aimed to systematically analyze available evidence on healthcare costs associated with osteoporosis-related hip fractures (HF) in Asia.
METHODS: Articles were systematically sought from databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and EBSCOHost between 2000 and 2015. Total costs associated with HF care, the cost components, and length of stays were retrieved and analyzed. Study designs were also qualitatively analyzed.
RESULTS: The availability of published studies on economic burden of HF in Asia is severely lacking with only 15 articles met the inclusion criteria. Even among the included studies, only two studies reported comprehensive costs evaluating all costs including indirect or intangible costs. Most studies satisfactorily reported criteria for conducting economic evaluation, but large variations existed in the methodological design. Due to study design and other influencing factors, large variation in the cost of HF treatment from US$774 to US$14,198.90 (median S$2943), representing an average of 18.95% (range: 3.58-57.05%) of the countries' 2014 GDP/capita, was observed. This highlighted the heavy burden of managing HF in Asia with about 40% of the included studies reported using more than one third of GDP/capita.
CONCLUSION: There is a paucity of burden of illness studies of osteoporosis in the Asian region. For the few available studies, there was a lack of standardization in methodological approach in evaluating the economic burden of the disease. There is a need to encourage more quality burden of illness studies of osteoporosis to inform policymakers in healthcare planning.
INTRODUCTION: Glucocorticoid therapy is associated with an appreciable risk of bone loss leading to fractures that require expensive treatments. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of bisphosphonates for prevention of hip fracture in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) in Malaysia.
METHOD: Retrospective data were collected from GIOP patients referred to the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre. Fracture events and direct medical costs were compared between bisphosphonates and calcium/vitamin D combination.
RESULTS: Fracture events were reported in 28 out of 93 included patients, with hip and vertebral fractures representing 42.9% and 35.7%, respectively. Overall, the use of bisphosphonates could not be considered cost-effective for treatment of all GIOP patients. The presence of certain fracture risk factors was able to modify the cost-effectiveness of bisphosphonates. Bisphosphonates was considered cost-effective if started in patients more than 60 years old. However, the use of bisphosphonates was not cost-effective in GIOP patients with secondary osteoporosis. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) of bisphosphonates in patients with risk factors of previous fracture or rheumatoid arthritis were Malaysian Ringgits (MYR) 108 603.40 and MYR 25 699.21, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Fracture risk factors of age, previous fracture, rheumatoid arthritis and secondary osteoporosis may modify the cost-effectiveness outcomes of bisphosphonates. Bisphosphonates would be considered cost-effective in patients more than 60 years old as compared to calcium/vitamin D treatments. Further evaluation of the impact of fracture risk factors in larger populations would provide more precise information to better assist rational and economical use of anti-osteoporosis treatment in GIOP patients.