4.3 Article

The costs of epilepsy misdiagnosis in England and Wales

Journal

SEIZURE-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF EPILEPSY
Volume 15, Issue 8, Pages 598-605

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2006.08.005

Keywords

epilepsy; misdiagnosis; financial costs; England and Wales

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The management of epilepsy incurs significant costs to the United Kingdom (UK) National Health Service (NHS). Making a diagnosis of epilepsy can, however, be difficult and misdiagnosis frequently occurs when patients are seen by non-specialists. This study estimates the financial costs of epilepsy misdiagnosis in the NHS in England and Wales. Methods: Standard costing methods were applied to estimate the costs attributable to epilepsy misdiagnosis. The primary data were published in UK studies on the prevalence of epilepsy, epilepsy misdiagnosis and costs identified from Medline, Cinahl and Embase (1996-May 2006). Results: An estimated total of 92,000 people were misdiagnosed with epilepsy in England and Wales in 2002. The average medical cost per patient per year of misdiagnosis was 316 pound, with the chief economic burdens being inpatient admissions (45%), inappropriate prescribing of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) (26%), outpatient attendances (16%) and general practitioner (GP) care (8%). The estimated annual medical costs in England and Wales were 29,000,000 pound, white total costs could reach up to El 38,000,000 a year. Conclusions: Allowing for uncertainty, and considering the analysis exclusively from the NHS/CBS (community based services) perspective the opportunity costs of misdiagnosis are substantial. There is a need for health care commissioners to ensure that misdiagnosis is kept to a minimum by ensuring that individuals with a recent onset suspected seizure are seen as soon as possible by a specialist medical practitioner with training and expertise in epilepsy. (C) 2006 British Epilepsy Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available