A Systematic Review of Cost-of-Illness Studies of Multimorbidity

Lili Wang, Lei Si, Fiona Cocker, Andrew J. Palmer and Kristy Sanderson ()
Additional contact information
Lili Wang: Menzies Institute for Medical Research and University of Tasmania
Lei Si: Menzies Institute for Medical Research and University of Tasmania
Fiona Cocker: Menzies Institute for Medical Research and University of Tasmania
Andrew J. Palmer: Menzies Institute for Medical Research and University of Tasmania
Kristy Sanderson: University of East Anglia

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 2018, vol. 16, issue 1, No 3, 15-29

Abstract: Abstract Objectives The economic burden of multimorbidity is considerable. This review analyzed the methods of cost-of-illness (COI) studies and summarized the economic outcomes of multimorbidity. Methods A systematic review (2000–2016) was performed, which was registered with Prospero, reported according to PRISMA, and used a quality checklist adapted for COI studies. The inclusion criteria were peer-reviewed COI studies on multimorbidity, whereas the exclusion criterion was studies focusing on an index disease. Extracted data included the definition, measure, and prevalence of multimorbidity; the number of included health conditions; the age of study population; the variables used in the COI methodology; the percentage of multimorbidity vs. total costs; and the average costs per capita. Results Among the 26 included articles, 14 defined multimorbidity as a simple count of 2 or more conditions. Methodologies used to derive the costs were markedly different. Given different healthcare systems, OOP payments of multimorbidity varied across countries. In the 17 and 12 studies with cut-offs of ≥2 and ≥3 conditions, respectively, the ratios of multimorbidity to non-multimorbidity costs ranged from 2–16 to 2–10. Among the ten studies that provided cost breakdowns, studies with and without a societal perspective attributed the largest percentage of multimorbidity costs to social care and inpatient care/medicine, respectively. Conclusion Multimorbidity was associated with considerable economic burden. Synthesising the cost of multimorbidity was challenging due to multiple definitions of multimorbidity and heterogeneity in COI methods. Count method was most popular to define multimorbidity. There is consistent evidence that multimorbidity was associated with higher costs.

Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-017-0346-6 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:16:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s40258-017-0346-6

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40258

DOI: 10.1007/s40258-017-0346-6

Access Statistics for this article

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson

More articles in Applied Health Economics and Health Policy from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().