Background: Country differences in resource use and costs of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) may be driven by differences in health care systems and resource availability.
Objective: To compare country resource utilization drivers of societal costs for AD dementia over 18 months.
Methods: GERAS is an observational study in France (n = 419), Germany (n = 550), and the UK (n = 526). Resource use of AD patients and caregivers contributing to >1% of total societal costs (year 2010) was assessed for country differences, adjusting for participant characteristics.
Results: Mean 18-month societal costs per patient were France €33,339, Germany €38,197, and UK €37,899 (£32,501). Caregiver time spent on basic and instrumental activities of daily living (ADL) contributed the most to societal costs (54% France, 64% Germany, 65% UK). Caregivers in France spent less time on ADL than UK caregivers and missed fewer work days than in other countries. Compared with other countries, patients in France used more community care services overall and were more likely to use home aid. Patients in Germany were least likely to use temporary accommodation or to be institutionalized at 18 months. UK caregivers spent the most time on instrumental ADL, UK patients used fewest outpatient resources, and UK patients/caregivers were most likely to receive financial support.
Conclusion: Caregiver time on ADL contributed the most to societal costs and differed across countries, possibly due to use of community care services and institutionalization. Other resources had different patterns of use across countries, reflecting country-specific health and social care systems.
JönssonL, WimoA (2009) The cost of dementia in Europe. a review of the evidence and methodological considerations. Pharmacoeconomics27, 391–403.
2.
GustavssonA, JonssonL, RappT, ReynishE, OussetPJ, AndrieuA, CantetC, WinbladB, VellasB, WimoA, on behalf of the ICTUS Study Group (2010) Differences in resource use and costs of dementia care between European countries: Baseline data from the ICTUS study. J Nutr Health Aging14, 648–654.
3.
MauskopfJ, RacketaJ, SherrillE (2010) Alzheimer’s disease: The strength of association of costs with different measures of disease severity. J Nutr Health Aging14, 655–663.
4.
MestertonJ, WimoA, ByA, LangworthS, WinbladB, JönssonL (2010) Cross sectional observational study on the societal costs of Alzheimer’s disease. Curr Alzheimer Res7, 358–367.
5.
QuentinW, Riedel-HellerSG, LuppaM, RudolphA, KonigHH (2010) Cost-of-illness studies of dementia: A systematic review focusing on stage dependency of costs. Acta Psychiatr Scand121, 243–259.
6.
LeichtH, HeinrichS, HeiderD, BachmannC, BickelH, van den BusscheH, FuchsA, LuppaM, MaierW, MöschE, PentzekM, Rieder-HellerSG, TebarthF, WerleJ, WeyererS, WieseB, ZimmermannT, KönigHH; AgeCoDe study group (2011) Net costs of dementia by disease stage. Acta Psychiatr Scand124, 384–395.
7.
RappT, AndrieuS, MolinierL, GrandA, CantetC, MullinsCD, VellasB (2012) Exploring the relationship between Alzheimer’s disease severity and longitudinal costs. Value Health15, 412–419.
8.
WimoA, ReedCC, DodelR, BelgerM, JonesRW, HappichM, ArgimonJM, BrunoG, NovickD, VellasB, HaroJM (2013) The GERAS study: A prospective observational study of costs and resource use in community dwellers with Alzheimer’s disease in three European countries–study design and baseline findings. J Alzheimers Dis36, 385–399.
9.
SchwarzkopfL, MennP, KunzS, HolleR, LauterbergJ, MarxP, MehligH, WunderS, LeidlR, DonathC, GraesselE (2011) Costs of care for dementia patients in community setting: An analysis for mild and moderate disease stage. Value Health14, 827–835.
10.
DarbáJ, KaskensL, LaceyL (2015) Relationship between global severity of patients with Alzheimer’s disease and costs of care in Spain; results from the co-dependence study in Spain. Eur J Health Econ16, 895–905.
11.
GillespieP, O’SheaE, CullinanJ, BuchananJ, BobulaJ, LaceyL, GallagherD, MhaolainAN, LawlorBfor the Enhancing Care in Alzheimer’s Disease (ECAD) Study Team (2015) Longitudinal costs of caring for people with Alzheimer’s disease. Int Psychogeriatr27, 847–856.
12.
SchallerS, MauskopfJ, KrizaC, WahlsterP, Kolominsky-RabasPL (2015) The main cost drivers in dementia: A systematic review. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry30, 111–129.
13.
McKhannG, DrachmanD, FolsteinM, KatzmanR, PriceD, StadlanEM (1984) Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease: Report of the NINCDS-ADRDA Work Group under the auspices of Department of Health and Human Services Task Force on Alzheimer’s Disease. Neurology34, 939–944.
14.
FolsteinMF, FolsteinSE, McHughPR (1975) “Mini-mental state.” A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatric Res12, 189–198.
15.
RosenWG, MohsRC, DavisKL (1984) A new rating scale for Alzheimer’s disease. Am J Psychiatry141, 1356–1364.
16.
GalaskoD, SchmittF, ThomasR, JinS, BennettD; Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study (2005) Detailed assessment of activities of daily living in moderate to severe Alzheimer’s disease. J Int Neuropsychol Soc11, 446–453.
17.
CummingsJL (1997) The Neuropsychiatric Inventory: Assessing psychopathology in dementia patients. Neurology48(Suppl 6), 10–16.
18.
ZaritSH, ReeverKE, Bach-PetersonJ (1980) Relatives of the impaired elderly: Correlates of feelings of burden. Gerontologist20, 649–655.
19.
WimoA, WetterholmAL, MasteyV, WinbladB (1998) Evaluation of the healthcare resource utilization and caregiver time in anti-dementia drug trials. The Health Economics of Dementia. WimoA, JönssonB, KarlssonG, WinbladB, Eds. John Wiley and Sons, London, pp. 465–499.
20.
WimoA, NordbergG (2007) Validity and reliability of assessments of time. Comparisons of direct observations and estimates of time by use of the resource utilization in dementia (RUD)-instrument. Arch Gerontol Geriatr44, 71–81.
21.
WimoA, JonssonL, ZbrozekA (2010) The resource utilization in dementia (RUD) instrument is valid for assessing informal care time in community-living patients with dementia. J Nutr Health Aging14, 685–690.
22.
WimoA, GustavssonA, JonssonL, WinbladB, HsuM-A, GannonB (2013) Application of Resource Utilization in Dementia (RUD) instrument in a global setting. Alzheimers Dement9, 429–435.
GervesC, ChauvinP, BellangerMM (2014) Evaluation of full costs of care for patients with Alzheimer’s disease in France: The predominant role of informal care. Health Policy116, 114–122.
PimouguetC, BassiV, SommeD, LavallartB, HelmerC, DartiguesJF (2013) The 2008-2012 French Alzheimer plan: A unique opportunity for improving integrated care for dementia. J Alzheimers Dis34, 307–314.
KnappM, Comas-Herrera, SomaniA, BanerjeeS (2007) Dementia: International Comparisons, http://www.pssru.ac.uk/pdf/dp2418.pdf, Accessed on March 31, 2015.
RappT, GrandA, CantetC, AndrieuS, ColeyN, PortetF, VellasB (2011) Public financial support receipt and non-medical resource utilization in Alzheimer’s disease results from the PLASA study. Soc Sci Med72, 1310–1316.
40.
ReeseJP, HessmannP, SeebergG, HenkelD, HirzmannP, RiekeJ, BaumE, DannhoffF, MüllerMJ, JessenF, GeldsetzerMB, DodelR (2011) Cost and care of patients with Alzheimer‘s disease: Clinical predictors in German health care settings. J Alzheimers Dis27, 723–736.
National Institute of Health and Care Excellence, NICE (2011) Donepezil, Galantamine, Rivastigmine and Memantine for the Treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease, https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta217, Accessed on February 19, 2015.
DodelR, BelgerM, ReedC, WimoA, JonesRW, HappichM, ArgimonJM, BrunoG, VellasB, HaroJM (2015) Determinants of societal costs in Alzheimer’s disease: GERAS study baseline results. Alzheimers Dement11, 933–945.
47.
SchwarzkopfL, MennP, LeidlR, GraesserE, HolleR (2013) Are community-living and institutionalized dementia patients cared for differently? Evidence on service utilization and costs of care from German insurance claims data. BMC Health Serv Res13:2, doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-2, http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/13/2, Accessed on August 12, 2015.
