The Burden of Migraine in Spain

Badı́a, Xavier; Magaz, S; Gutiérrez, Laura; Galván, Jordi

doi:10.2165/00019053-200422090-00004

Cited by 42 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Interestingly, this statistically significant difference disappeared when psychiatric comorbidity variables (anxiety and depression) were entered into the model. The much higher costs per patient reflected in this study than in the French study [34] and Spanish study [33] may therefore at least partly be due to the differences in cost assessment methodology, indicating that the direct costs specifically related to migraine and not to comorbid disorders are most reliably assessed by a direct method, questioning patients about use of health-care resources.…”

Section: Economic Impact Of Headachementioning

confidence: 74%

“…In one study from Spain [33] the annual costs of migraine was only about 50% of the sum given in the European Cost study for the same country. The difference may partly be explained by somewhat lower prevalence figures (12 vs. 14%) for migraine used in the Spanish study, but the main difference may be that this study did not employ a bottom-up design, but used published statistics and data to estimate resource use and productivity losses, which may have led to an underestimation of some costs.…”

Section: Economic Impact Of Headachementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of headache in Europe: a review for the Eurolight project

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A recent health economic survey in Europe has suggested that migraine is the costliest among the neurological disorders. According to many studies, migraine and other disorders lead to widespread suffering, reduction of quality of life, and marked impairment of participation, both in work and social activities. The present literature survey was made in order to summarize what is known on the subject, as a preparation for a EU-supported study to assess the impact in several EU countries with similar methodology and the same research instrument. Previous studies have yielded relatively reliable data only for migraine, whereas the impact of tension-type headache is virtually unknown or only very incompletely known for most dimensions of headache impact. Some data do suggest, however, that this headache may be as important from a health economic and a public health perspective as migraine. In future studies it is important to get population-based data from various countries relevant for estimation of indirect (mostly absenteeism from work and reduced working efficiency when having headache) and direct costs (related to medication, consultations, investigations and hospitalisations). Also, the impact on ability to get education and participate in the workforce is very relevant, as is the impact on love life and family planning. The quality of life of headache patients should be measured by validated instruments. To get a complete picture, one should also ask about the effect on the life of partners and children, and on the possible impact even when headache-free (e.g. fear of the next attack).

show abstract

Section: Economic Impact Of Headachementioning

confidence: 74%

Section: Economic Impact Of Headachementioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of headache in Europe: a review for the Eurolight project

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The cost data literature review resulted in 33 relevant cost studies identified for 11 disorders (Table 2): anxiety disorder [23], dementia [24]–[31], epilepsy [32], [33], headache [15], [34], [35], mood disorders [36]–[40], multiple sclerosis [14], [41]–[43], Parkinson's disease [24], [44], psychotic disorders [45], [46], stroke [24], [47]–[50] and neuromuscular diseases [51]. Two articles were excluded from de model because they presented outlier estimations for stroke [52], [53] and traumatic brain injury [52].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For psychotic disorders no high quality information was found, whereas for epilepsy and neuromuscular disorders all articles included were considered high quality articles. For five disorders costs were recalculated using only the high quality articles stated: dementia [24], [30], [31], headache [15], [35], mood disorders [36], multiple sclerosis [14], [41], [42], Parkinson's disease [24] and stroke [47], [48], [50].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost of Disorders of the Brain in Spain

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundBrain disorders represent a high burden in Europe and worldwide. The objective of this study was to provide specific estimates of the economic costs of brain disorders in Spain, based on published epidemiological and economic evidence.MethodsA cost-of-illness study with a societal perspective of 19 brain disorders was carried out. Cost data published between 2004 and 2012 was obtained from a systematic literature review. Direct healthcare, direct non-medical and indirect costs were considered, prioritizing bottom-up information. All costs were converted to Euro and to year 2010. The missing values were imputed with European estimates. Sensitivity analyses based on qualitative assessment of the literature and on a Monte Carlo simulation were performed.ResultsThe review identified 33 articles with information on costs for 11 disorders (8 neurological, 3 mental). The average per–patient cost ranged from 36,946 € for multiple sclerosis to 402 € for headache. The societal cost of the 19 brain disorders in Spain in 2010 was estimated in 84 € billion. Societal costs ranged from 15 € billion for dementia to 65 € million for eating disorders. Mental disorders societal cost were 46 € billions (55% of the total), while neurological disorder added up to 38 € billion. Healthcare costs represented 37% of the societal costs of brain disorders, whereas direct non-medical constituted 29% and indirect costs 33%.ConclusionBrain disorders have a substantial economic impact in Spain (equivalent to almost 8% of the country's GDP). Economic data on several important brain disorders, specially mental disorders, is still sparse.

show abstract

“…A study conducted in neurology clinics indicated that 23.9% of migraine patients referred form PC were not receiving any type of treatment, while among patients attending neurology clinics without a previous PC diagnostic approach was 85.7% [3]. This data indicate the importance of the diagnosis when a patient has to initiate treatment, bearing in mind the level of disability both, in work and day life activities, this disorder produces [14,35]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New uses of the Migraine Screen Questionnaire (MS-Q): validation in the Primary Care setting and ability to detect hidden migraine. MS-Q in Primary Care

Láinez

Castillo²,

Domínguez

et al. 2010

BMC Neurol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPC plays an important role in early diagnosis of health disorders, particularly migraine, due to the financial impact of this disease for the society and its impact on patients' quality of life. The aim of the study was to validate the self-administered MS-Q questionnaire for detection of hidden migraine in the field of primary care (PC), and to explore its use in this setting.MethodsCross-sectional, observational, and multicentre study in subjects above 18 years of age patients attending PC centers (regardless of the reason for consultation). A MS-Q score ≥ 4 was considered possible migraine. Level of agreement with IHS criteria clinical diagnosis (kappa coefficient), and instrument's validity properties: sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values were determined. The ability of the instrument to identify possible new cases of migraine was calculated, as well as the ratio of hidden disease compared to the ratio obtained by IHS criteria.ResultsA total of 9,670 patients were included [48.9 ± 17.2 years (mean ± SD); 61.9% women], from 410 PC centers representative of the whole national territory. The clinical prevalence of migraine according to the IHS criteria was 24.7%, and 20.4% according to MS-Q: Kappa index of agreement 0.82 (p < 0.05). MS-Q sensitivity was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.81 - 0.84), specificity 0.97 (95% CI, 0.98 - 0.99), PPV 0.95 (95% CI, 0.94 - 0.96), and NPV 0.94 (95% CI, 0.93 - 0.95). No statistically significant differences were found in the percentages of patients with de novo and hidden migraine identified by MS-Q and by IHS criteria: 5.7% vs. 6.1% and 26.6% vs. 24.1%, respectively.ConclusionsThe results of the present study confirm the usefulness of the MS-Q questionnaire for the early detection and assessment of migraine in PC settings, and its ability to detect hidden migraine.

show abstract

The Burden of Migraine in Spain

Cited by 42 publications

References 51 publications

Impact of headache in Europe: a review for the Eurolight project

Impact of headache in Europe: a review for the Eurolight project

Cost of Disorders of the Brain in Spain

New uses of the Migraine Screen Questionnaire (MS-Q): validation in the Primary Care setting and ability to detect hidden migraine. MS-Q in Primary Care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About