Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- Inzidenz <Medizin> (3) (remove)
Institute
Aim:
To characterize palliative care patients, to estimate the incidence, prevalence, and 1-year all-cause mortality in patients in Germany who received palliative care treatment.
Subject and methods:
The study analyzed the InGef Research Database, which covers 4 million people insured in German statutory health insurance companies. Specific outpatient and inpatient reimbursement codes were used to capture cases with palliative conditions. The prevalence was ascertained for the year 2015. The incidence was calculated for patients without documented palliative care services in the year before the observation period. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to analyze the 1-year all-cause mortality.
Results:
The incidence rate of palliative conditions was 41.3 and 34.9 per 10,000 persons in women and men, respectively. The prevalence per 10,000 persons was 61.3 in women and 51.1 in men. The 1-year all-cause mortality among patients receiving their first palliative care treatment was 67.5%. Mortality was lower in patients receiving general outpatient palliative care treatment (AAPV; 60.8%) compared to patients receiving specialized outpatient palliative care treatment (SAPV; 86.1%) or inpatient palliative care treatment (90.6%). Within the first 30 days, mortality was particularly high (~43.0%).
Conclusions:
In Germany, more than 400,000 patients per year receive palliative care treatment, which is lower compared to estimates of the number of persons with a potential need for palliative care. This gap was observed particularly in younger to middle-aged individuals. The findings indicate a demand for methodologically sound studies to investigate the public health burden and to quantify the unmet need for palliative care in Germany.
Background
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) causes significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Estimation of incidence, prevalence and disease burden through routine insurance data is challenging because of under-diagnosis and under-treatment, particularly for early stage disease in health care systems where outpatient International Classification of Diseases (ICD) diagnoses are not collected. This poses the question of which criteria are commonly applied to identify COPD patients in claims datasets in the absence of ICD diagnoses, and which information can be used as a substitute. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize previously reported methodological approaches for the identification of COPD patients through routine data and to compile potential criteria for the identification of COPD patients if ICD codes are not available.
Methods
A systematic literature review was performed in Medline via PubMed and Google Scholar from January 2000 through October 2018, followed by a manual review of the included studies by at least two independent raters. Study characteristics and all identifying criteria used in the studies were systematically extracted from the publications, categorized, and compiled in evidence tables.
Results
In total, the systematic search yielded 151 publications. After title and abstract screening, 38 publications were included into the systematic assessment. In these studies, the most frequently used (22/38) criteria set to identify COPD patients included ICD codes, hospitalization, and ambulatory visits. Only four out of 38 studies used methods other than ICD coding. In a significant proportion of studies, the age range of the target population (33/38) and hospitalization (30/38) were provided. Ambulatory data were included in 24, physician claims in 22, and pharmaceutical data in 18 studies. Only five studies used spirometry, two used surgery and one used oxygen therapy.
Conclusions
A variety of different criteria is used for the identification of COPD from routine data. The most promising criteria set in data environments where ambulatory diagnosis codes are lacking is the consideration of additional illness-related information with special attention to pharmacotherapy data. Further health services research should focus on the application of more systematic internal and/or external validation approaches.
Background:
Huntington’s disease (HD) is a rare, genetic, neurodegenerative and ultimately fatal disease with no cure or progression-delaying treatment currently available. HD is characterized by a triad of cognitive, behavioural and motor symptoms. Evidence on epidemiology and management of HD is limited, especially for Germany. This study aims to estimate the incidence and prevalence of HD and analyze the current routine care based on German claims data.
Methods:
The source of data was a sample of the Institute for Applied Health Research Berlin (InGef) Research Database, comprising data of approximately four million insured persons from approximately 70 German statutory health insurances. The study was conducted in a retrospective cross-sectional design using 2015 and 2016 as a two-year observation period. At least two outpatient or inpatient ICD-10 codes for HD (ICD-10: G10) during the study period were required for case identification. Patients were considered incident if no HD diagnoses in the 4 years prior to the year of case identification were documented. Information on outpatient drug dispensations, medical aids and remedies were considered to describe the current treatment situation of HD patients.
Results:
A 2-year incidence of 1.8 per 100,000 persons (95%-Confidence interval (CI): 1.4–2.4) and a 2-year period prevalence of 9.3 per 100,000 persons (95%-CI: 8.3–10.4) was observed. The prevalence of HD increased with advancing age, peaking at 60–69 years (16.8 per 100,000 persons; 95%-CI: 13.4–21.0) and decreasing afterwards.
The most frequently observed comorbidities and disease-associated symptoms in HD patients were depression (42.9%), dementia (37.7%), urinary incontinence (32.5%), extrapyramidal and movement disorders (30.5%), dysphagia (28.6%) and disorders of the lipoprotein metabolism (28.2%).
The most common medications in HD patients were antipsychotics (66.9%), followed by antidepressants (45.1%). Anticonvulsants (16.6%), opioids (14.6%) and hypnotics (9.7%) were observed less frequently.
Physical therapy was the most often used medical aid in HD patients (46.4%). Nursing services and speech therapy were used by 27.9 and 22.7% of HD patients, respectively, whereas use of psychotherapy was rare (3.2%).
Conclusions:
Based on a representative sample, this study provides new insights into the epidemiology and routine care of HD patients in Germany, and thus, may serve as a starting point for further research.