Part, Chapter, Paragraph
1 I, 2. 1 | that health is not only a cost for Society, but may largely
2 I, 2. 10. 4 | efficient way and at a lower cost than manual identification
3 I, 2. 10. 4 | safety incidents, which may cost around £2 billion/year in
4 I, 2. 10. 4 | Italy resulted in a 30% cost reduction in the drug supply
5 I, 2. 10. 4 | recognised by another and the cost burden to the stakeholders
6 II, 5. 1. 3 | contribute to reducing the cost of long-term care for patients
7 II, 5. 2. 4 | to obtain due to the high cost of health examination surveys.
8 II, 5. 3. 2 | life, hospitalisation or cost per case have to be collected
9 II, 5. 3. 2 | activity in the EU. The cost of human and capital resources
10 II, 5. 3. 7 | The rapidly increasing cost of anticancer drugs and
11 II, 5. 3. 7 | metastatic cancer and thus the cost of treatment is rapidly
12 II, 5. 3. 7 | at a minimal additional cost.~ ~The 2007 Portuguese Presidency
13 II, 5. 4. 1 | lack of sanitation, and low cost food constitute a threatening
14 II, 5. 4. 1 | 2000) observed that the cost profile during the natural
15 II, 5. 4. 2 | the outcome and reduce the cost of this chronic disease.~
16 II, 5. 4. 8 | Advisory Board, Revealing the cost of Type II diabetes in Europe.
17 II, 5. 4. 8 | sheet no 236. Diabetes: the cost of diabetes. Revised September
18 II, 5. 5. 1 | Kennelly B (2007). The economic cost of suicide in Ireland. Crisis
19 II, 5. 5. 1 | and Huber.~ ~S C (2006). Cost of depression in Europe.
20 II, 5. 5. 2 | analysis of the socio-economic cost of Alzheimer’s disease.~ ~
21 II, 5. 5. 3 | with respect to morbidity, cost, suffering, and function.
22 II, 5. 5. 3 | Wittchen HU, Olesen J (2005): Cost of disorders of the brain
23 II, 5. 5. 3 | Andlin-Sobocki P, & Rössler W (2005):Cost of psychotic disorders in
24 II, 5. 5. 3 | that children with autism cost £2.7 billion (Euros 3.8
25 II, 5. 5. 3 | of the overall economic cost of autism in the UK.~Since
26 II, 5. 5. 3 | MS social costs are high. Cost data were extrapolated for
27 II, 5. 5. 3 | presented as total annual cost per patient in 2005, total
28 II, 5. 5. 3 | additional € 8 billion. The cost per MS case in Europe ranges
29 II, 5. 5. 3 | amount to 56% of the total cost, and within these, drug
30 II, 5. 5. 3 | only represent 7% of total cost, explaining the intense
31 II, 5. 5. 3 | 1. Distribution of total cost of MS in Europe (year 2005)
32 II, 5. 5. 3 | represent 22% of the total cost. No reliable estimates of
33 II, 5. 5. 3 | reliable estimates of the cost of premature death were
34 II, 5. 5. 3 | environment in which the cost of the disease of MS on
35 II, 5. 5. 3 | the economics of (i.e. the cost of illness of) MS.~This
36 II, 5. 5. 3 | 2007): Estimation of the cost of MS in Europe: Extrapolations
37 II, 5. 5. 3 | Extrapolations from a multinational cost study. Mult Scler 13(8):
38 II, 5. 5. 3 | Goetz and Stebbins, 1993).~ ~Cost of illness~A recent study,
39 II, 5. 5. 3 | Andlin-Sobocki et al, 2005). The cost per case differed significantly
40 II, 5. 5. 3 | Switzerland) with an average cost per patient of €7,600.~ ~
41 II, 5. 5. 3 | 600.~ ~Figure 5.5.3.6.2. Cost per case in PD in selected
42 II, 5. 5. 3 | PPP, 2004)~ ~The total cost of PD was estimated at €
43 II, 5. 5. 3 | and EFTA countries. Direct cost outside the formal healthcare
44 II, 5. 5. 3 | the single most dominant cost category totalling €6.1
45 II, 5. 5. 3 | constituting 57% of the total cost. Direct healthcare cost
46 II, 5. 5. 3 | cost. Direct healthcare cost totalled to €4.6 billion.
47 II, 5. 5. 3 | largest part of the healthcare cost, estimated at €1.9 billion.
48 II, 5. 5. 3 | of PD.~The prevalence and cost data were stratified according
49 II, 5. 5. 3 | stages of PD (HY I) average cost are €3,400 per patient,
50 II, 5. 5. 3 | per patient, whereas the cost for severely disabled PD
51 II, 5. 5. 3 | Figure 5.5.3.6.3. Cost of Parkinson’s disease stratified
52 II, 5. 5. 3 | services and society, ii) the cost of PD markedly increase
53 II, 5. 5. 3 | iii) the majority of the cost of PD can be found outside
54 II, 5. 5. 3 | almost 60% of the total cost of PD. These results are
55 II, 5. 5. 3 | Spottke et al, 2005). Direct cost only reflect a small portion
56 II, 5. 5. 3 | single-households” in the future.~The cost per patient was found to
57 II, 5. 5. 3 | show the highest average cost for PD in countries with
58 II, 5. 5. 3 | included a broad range of cost categories and of similar
59 II, 5. 5. 3 | Wittchen HU, Olesen J (2005): Cost of disorders of the brain
60 II, 5. 5. 3 | Dujardin M, Ziegler M (1999): Cost of illness and disease severity
61 II, 5. 5. 3 | Siebert U, Dodel R (2005): Cost of Parkinson’s disease in
62 II, 5. 5. 3 | DJ (2007): Predicting the cost of Parkinson’s disease.
63 II, 5. 5. 3 | Ulm G, Dodel R (2005): Cost of illness and its predictors
64 II, 5. 6. 3 | 1999).~ ~In the Swedish Cost of Illness Study, musculoskeletal
65 II, 5. 6. 3 | representing 22.6% of the total cost of illness (Jacobson and
66 II, 5. 6. 3 | second as a health care cost in 1994 (Meerding et al,
67 II, 5. 6. 3 | Joint replacement is a major cost. Total hip replacement rates,
68 II, 5. 6. 3 | The direct and indirect cost of illness are twice as
69 II, 5. 6. 3 | enormous. About 90% of the cost of back pain is indirect
70 II, 5. 6. 4 | disability. This has major cost implications and represents
71 II, 5. 6. 4 | 1998). The total direct cost for health services due
72 II, 5. 6. 6 | healthcare costs in Netherlands: cost of illness study. BMJ 317:
73 II, 5. 7. 1 | ESRD and the resulting cost of renal replacement treatments
74 II, 5. 7. 1 | pre ESRD phase entails a cost excess of $26.000 per case
75 II, 5. 7. 7 | Keith DS, Brown JB (2004): Cost of medical care for chronic
76 II, 5. 8. 3 | The Northern Ireland Cost and Epidemiology of Chronic
77 II, 5. 8. 3 | that the overall annual cost for COPD in Europe (excluding
78 II, 5. 8. 3 | the average total medical cost of every COPD patient was
79 II, 5. 8. 3 | of the total direct COPD cost was directed to hospitalisations
80 II, 5. 8. 3 | FEV1. The total medical cost for COPD patients in France
81 II, 5. 8. 3 | that, considering the total cost for treatment of 40+ year
82 II, 5. 8. 3 | Bilde et al, 2007). The net cost for COPD patients was 256
83 II, 5. 8. 3 | five-year period. The total cost was 544,547 Euro. Average
84 II, 5. 8. 3 | hospital was 11.37 days and the cost of treatment per patient
85 II, 5. 8. 3 | patients, length of stay, cost of treatment) were higher
86 II, 5. 8. 5 | patients at a reasonable cost.~ ~Policies~ ~Different
87 II, 5. 8. 7 | Borgeskov H, Lange P (2007): The cost of treating patients with
88 II, 5. 9. FB | present no risk and have a low cost.~ ~All exposure to tobacco smoke
89 II, 5. 9. FB | systems for then reducing the cost of the allergenic care for
90 II, 5. 9. 3 | systems but then reducing the cost of the allergenic care to
91 II, 5. 9. 3 | as a whole.~ ~The total cost of care for asthma amounts
92 II, 5. 9. 3 | more than a half of the cost imposed by the disease on
93 II, 5. 9. 3 | 37% of the total direct cost of asthma; hospital costs
94 II, 5. 9. 3 | costs were 20-25%: inpatient cost were the major component (
95 II, 5. 9. 3 | five-year period. Total cost was 90 771 Euro. Average
96 II, 5. 9. 3 | hospital was 9.85 days and the cost of treatment per patient
97 II, 5. 9. 3 | patients, length of stay, cost of treatment) was higher
98 II, 5. 10. 4 | step to calculate the real cost and social burden linked
99 II, 5. 10. 4 | intolerance goes far beyond the cost of diagnosis, treatment
100 II, 5. 10. 7 | 2007): The prevalence, cost and basis of food allergy
101 II, 5. 11. 4 | diseases, with much of that cost being borne by patients
102 II, 5. 11. 6 | prevalence, incidence and cost of skin diseases is required
103 II, 5. 11. 7 | Roijen L, et al (2002): The cost of atopic dermatitis in
104 II, 5. 12. 5 | related to a fall in the real cost of alcoholic beverages,
105 II, 5. 13 | a compilation of direct cost studies worldwide including
106 II, 5. 14. 3 | decision-making and would reduce the cost of care for periodontal
107 II, 5. 15. 1 | threshold under which the cost of developing a drug will
108 II, 5. 15. 3 | available to date.~ ~The cost of treating RD and caring
109 II, 6. 3. 1(3)| incidence, morbidity, mortality, cost, burden, etc., and to suggest
110 II, 6. 3. 1 | 16 million) in 2004 the cost attributable to norovirus
111 II, 6. 3. 1 | The 2003 SARS outbreak cost some countries about 1%
112 II, 6. 3. 1 | sectors; and~· health and cost consequences of recent high
113 II, 7. 5 | substantial proportion of direct cost related to injury is absorbed
114 II, 8. 2. 1 | of unmet dental need and cost barriers to care for developmentally
115 II, 9. 1. 2 | provision, quality and financial cost of medical, social and educational
116 II, 9. 1. 2 | provision, quality and financial cost of prenatal screening in
117 II, 9. 1. 2 | population and its psychological cost to pregnant women.~ ~Congenital (“
118 II, 9. 2. 2 | minor inconvenience and cost of producing an additional
119 II, 9. 3. 1 | accidents are estimated to cost the EU about 20 billion
120 II, 9. 4. 5 | on quality, standards and cost control - often centrally
121 II, 9. 4. 5 | interest of efficiency and cost effectiveness and of ensuring
122 II, 9. 4. 5 | professionals and patients integrate cost considerations into their
123 II, 9. 4. 6 | For example, the financial cost of placing people with dementia
124 II, 9. 5. 3 | Women’s Aid, 2004).~ ~The cost of domestic violence to
125 II, 9. 5. 3 | England & Wales in 2004, the cost of intimate partner violence
126 II, 9. 5. 3 | violence in a family may cost society 185 000 Finnish
127 III, 10. 1. 1 | non-alcoholic drinks as well as the cost of alcohol are examples
128 III, 10. 2. 1 | interventions are the second most cost effective way to spend health
129 III, 10. 2. 1 | Lapsley HM (200): Counting the cost: Estimate of the social
130 III, 10. 2. 1 | harm also has its social cost, which has been estimated
131 III, 10. 2. 1 | 10.2.1.2.5. The tangible cost of alcohol in Europe per
132 III, 10. 2. 1 | of alcohol in Europe per cost element (year 2003)~ ~
133 III, 10. 2. 1 | place, this occurs at the cost of an overall increase in
134 III, 10. 2. 1 | Review of effectiveness and cost effectiveness - Main report (
135 III, 10. 2. 1 | physical inactivity can cost a country about €150-300
136 III, 10. 2. 1 | a compilation of direct cost studies worldwide including
137 III, 10. 2. 4 | high-throughput and low cost sequencing, are already
138 III, 10. 3. 1 | estimate that the social cost of road noise pollution
139 III, 10. 3. 1 | completed by 2018, at an overall cost of around EUR 4 billion (
140 III, 10. 3. 2 | than the GDP. The economic cost of late action — both in
141 III, 10. 4. 1 | web site).~ ~The total cost of air pollution related
142 III, 10. 4. 1 | lost (VOLY).~This estimated cost of non-action has to be
143 III, 10. 4. 1 | has to be compared with cost of action focused on different
144 III, 10. 4. 1 | and national level. The cost of action has been calculated
145 III, 10. 4. 1 | to over 20%. The societal cost is estimated at 3 billion
146 III, 10. 4. 5 | build consensus.~ ~Since the cost of hazardous waste disposal
147 III, 10. 5. 1 | Miller DM, Meek F, (2004): Cost and efficacy comparison
148 III, 10. 5. 3 | mortality. This was estimated to cost about €24.4 billion. Additionally,
149 III, 10. 5. 3 | per 1000 population) at a cost of € 10.8 billion. Thus,
150 III, 10. 5. 3 | in order to reduce the cost of implementing the relative
151 III, 10. 5. 3 | EUROGIP (2004): Cost and funding of occupational
152 III, 10. 6. 1 | McLeod J, Wethington E. The cost of caring: a perspective
153 IV, 11. 1. 3 | concerns towards efficiency and cost containment (OECD 2007).
154 IV, 11. 1. 3 | more complicated as the cost of health care continues
155 IV, 11. 1. 3 | this context of increasing cost pressure on European health
156 IV, 11. 1. 3 | 11.1.3.1. Cost pressures and performance
157 IV, 11. 1. 3 | equality of coverage to cost containment and increasing
158 IV, 11. 1. 3 | efficiency; and only short-term cost savings (Cutler, 2002).
159 IV, 11. 1. 3 | largely by: a) increasing cost sharing; b) introducing
160 IV, 11. 1. 4 | factors, such as the degree of cost sharing in the system. In
161 IV, 11. 1. 4 | countries that do rely on cost sharing arrangements, extensive
162 IV, 11. 1. 5 | care~ ~After a period of cost containment and efforts
163 IV, 11. 1. 5 | Further challenges include the cost of acquiring information
164 IV, 11. 1. 6 | service at a reasonable cost to maintain the confidence
165 IV, 11. 1. 6 | services provided, and the cost of services do not affect
166 IV, 11. 1. 6 | 1980s, leading to initial cost savings and efficiency improvements.
167 IV, 11. 1. 6 | dumping’ of complex, high cost patients (Busse et al, 2006).
168 IV, 11. 1. 6 | reimbursement. Finally, cost shifting and quality skimping
169 IV, 11. 1. 6 | hospitals with predefined cost accounting standards (including
170 IV, 11. 1. 6 | directly by the average cost per DRG, while in other
171 IV, 11. 1. 6 | in other countries, DRG cost weights are used. Whether
172 IV, 11. 1. 6 | other factors affecting the cost of service delivery. These
173 IV, 11. 1. 6 | Austria, hospitals became more cost conscious, hospital activities
174 IV, 11. 2. 1 | because of the perceived high cost of hospital care, the challenges
175 IV, 11. 2. 2 | public health intervention cost effectiveness evaluation
176 IV, 11. 2. 2 | base on the availability of cost effective pharmaceutical
177 IV, 11. 3. 2 | 2007). This could be due to cost containment efforts throughout
178 IV, 11. 3. 2 | must bare the additional cost of a more expensive product.
179 IV, 11. 3. 2 | suggests, however, that where cost savings through reference
180 IV, 11. 3. 2 | what level to reimburse the cost of drugs to the insurance
181 IV, 11. 3. 2 | products (2005)~ ~The total cost of pharmaceuticals to society
182 IV, 11. 3. 2 | Hungary, have the lowest cost.~ ~Research and development
183 IV, 11. 6 | levels of coverage (including cost sharing), and how benefits
184 IV, 11. 6. 2 | purchasing, defining benefits, cost sharing. The implications
185 IV, 11. 6. 2 | covered) and depth (level of cost sharing) of coverage varies
186 IV, 11. 6. 2 | protection. In some countries cost sharing has been introduced
187 IV, 11. 6. 2 | reductions. Careful design of cost sharing policies is needed
188 IV, 11. 6. 2 | European health systems), cost sharing for services in
189 IV, 11. 6. 2 | out-of-pocket payment include both cost sharing and direct payments) (
190 IV, 11. 6. 2 | taxes can be used to reduce cost sharing or finance care
191 IV, 11. 6. 2 | 98% of those eligible for cost sharing) (Thomson, Foubister
192 IV, 11. 6. 2 | form of tax relief on the cost of premiums (Colombo and
193 IV, 11. 6. 2 | pure private’ payments), cost sharing (individuals who
194 IV, 11. 6. 2 | funded by the public system). Cost sharing exists to some extent
195 IV, 11. 6. 2 | The three forms of direct cost sharing consist of: co-payment,
196 IV, 11. 6. 2 | proportion of the total cost; and deductible, wherein
197 IV, 11. 6. 2 | benefit to them. Hence, cost sharing is expected to improve
198 IV, 11. 6. 2 | budgets are under pressure, cost sharing has also been argued
199 IV, 11. 6. 2 | by supply side factors, cost containment in the long-term
200 IV, 11. 6. 2 | unlikely to result from a cost sharing arrangement. Finally,
201 IV, 11. 6. 2 | of the literature shows cost sharing for prescription
202 IV, 11. 6. 2 | out-of-pocket payments into cost sharing, direct payments
203 IV, 11. 6. 2 | be due to an increase in cost sharing but may also reflect
204 IV, 11. 6. 2 | States have in place some cost sharing for services covered
205 IV, 11. 6. 2 | package. In all countries, cost sharing is applied to pharmaceuticals
206 IV, 11. 6. 2 | EU countries also require cost sharing for ambulatory physician
207 IV, 11. 6. 2 | at the point of use but cost sharing is applied to inpatient
208 IV, 11. 6. 2 | Austria. For inpatient care, cost sharing tends to be in the
209 IV, 11. 6. 2 | Prescription drugs may have cost sharing in the form of a
210 IV, 11. 6. 2 | individuals must pay the full cost of prescription drugs up
211 IV, 11. 6. 2 | the newer Member States, cost sharing for ambulatory physicians
212 IV, 11. 6. 2 | been introduced to limit cost sharing, e.g. in Estonia
213 IV, 11. 6. 2 | sharing, e.g. in Estonia cost sharing for primary care
214 IV, 11. 6. 2 | European countries require cost sharing for at least some
215 IV, 11. 6. 2 | Also in some countries, cost sharing arrangements were
216 IV, 11. 6. 2 | Table 11.13. Examples for cost sharing exemptions~ ~ ~Clinical
217 IV, 11. 6. 2 | cannot afford the extra cost are unable to obtain treatment,
218 IV, 11. 6. 4 | is needed to enable the cost of each plan or insurance
219 IV, 11. 6. 4 | socioeconomic status (and cost variation)~Estonia~Taxation
220 IV, 11. 6. 4 | low birthweight (and rural cost adjustment)~Norway~Norwegian
221 IV, 11. 6. 4 | based)~Age, sex, mortality (cost adjustment for sparse population)~
222 IV, 11. 6. 4 | package and the level of cost sharing in the system; where
223 IV, 11. 6. 5 | A literature review of cost sharing for prescription
224 IV, 11. 6. 5 | 2004): An overview of cost sharing for health services
225 IV, 11. 6. 5 | appropriate role for patient cost sharing. Critical challenges
226 IV, 11. 6. 5 | 1999): Health care and cost containment in the European
227 IV, 11. 6. 5 | Scitovsky AA (1984): " 'The high cost of dying': what do the data
228 IV, 11. 6. 5 | Understanding health care cost drivers and escalators.
229 IV, 11. 6. 5 | Mossialos E et al. (2003): Cost sharing for health services
230 IV, 12. 2 | place, it does so at the cost of an overall increase in
231 IV, 13.Acr | recent inclusion of the cost effectiveness evaluation
232 IV, 13. 5 | concerns about the quality and cost of institutional care are
233 IV, 13. 6. 1 | earning of the parent(s);~· Cost to society of health care
234 IV, 13. 9 | Wittchen HU, Olesen J (2005): Cost of disorders of the brain
