4.7 Article

Monetary value of lost productivity over a five year follow up in early rheumatoid arthritis estimated on the basis of official register data on patients' sickness absence and gross income:: experience from the FIN-RACo trial

期刊

ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES
卷 65, 期 7, 页码 899-904

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/ard.2005.045807

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To explore the monetary value of rheumatoid arthritis related loss of productivity in patients with early active disease. Methods: In a prospective cohort substudy of the FIN-RACo Trial, 162 patients with recent onset rheumatoid arthritis, aged 18 to 65 years and available to the workforce, were followed up for five years. Loss of work productivity in euros 2002 was estimated by data on absence for sickness and on income (human capital approach) from official databases. Treatment responses were evaluated by area under the curve (AUC) of the ACR-N measure and by increase in number of erosions in radiographs of hands and feet. The health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) at six months was linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Results: In all, 120 (75%) patients, women more often (82%) than men (61%) (p = 0.002), lost work days. The mean lost productivity per patient-year was 7217euro (95% confidence interval (CI), 5561 to 9148): for women, 6477euro (4858 to 8536) and for men, 8443euro (5389 to 12 898). There was an inverse correlation with improvement: 1101euro (323 to 2156) and 14 952euro (10 662 to 19 852) for the highest and lowest quartiles of AUC of ARC-N, respectively. Lost productivity was associated with increase in the number of erosions and with disability in changing and maintaining body position'' subcategory of the ICF. Conclusions: Despite remission targeted treatment with disease modifying antirheumatic drugs, early rheumatoid arthritis results in substantial loss of productivity. A good improvement in the disease reduces the loss markedly.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据