IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0204206.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disease and economic burden for rare diseases in Taiwan: A longitudinal study using Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database

Author

Listed:
  • Jason C Hsu
  • Huai-Chueh Wu
  • Wen-Chia Feng
  • Chih-Ho Chou
  • Edward Chia-Cheng Lai
  • Christine Y Lu

Abstract

Background: High-cost orphan drugs are becoming increasingly available to treat rare diseases that affect a relatively small population. Little attention has been given to the prevalence of rare diseases and their health-related economic burden in Taiwan. Objectives: This study examined the national trends in the prevalence of rare diseases and their health-related economic burden (including medication costs) in Taiwan. Methods: Rare disease-related claims data from 2003–2014 (12 years) from the National Health Insurance Research Database were used in this study. We used a time series analysis to assess trends in the yearly rates of treated patients with rare diseases, overall healthcare use, and expenditures, including drugs. Results: During the 12-year study period, the estimated prevalence of rare diseases increased from 10.57 to 33.21 per 100,000 population, an average rate of a 19.46% increase per year. Total health expenditures for treatment of rare diseases increased from US$18.65 million to US$137.44 million between 2003 and 2014, accounting for 0.68% of the total national health expenditures in 2014. Drug expenditures for treatment of rare diseases increased from US$13.24 million to US$121.98 million between 2003 and 2014, which accounted for 71.00% and 88.75% of the health expenditures for patients with rare diseases in 2003 and 2014, respectively. In 2014, we found a 20.43-fold difference in average health expenditures and a 69.46-fold difference in average drug expenditures between patients with rare diseases and the overall population. Conclusions: The prevalence of rare diseases and the related economic burden have grown substantially in Taiwan over the past 12 years, and these trends are likely to continue. Drug expenditures accounted for almost 90% of health expenditures for rare diseases. Further analyses are underway to examine the economic burden of individual rare diseases.

Suggested Citation

  • Jason C Hsu & Huai-Chueh Wu & Wen-Chia Feng & Chih-Ho Chou & Edward Chia-Cheng Lai & Christine Y Lu, 2018. "Disease and economic burden for rare diseases in Taiwan: A longitudinal study using Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-14, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0204206
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0204206
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0204206
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0204206&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0204206?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Todd Gammie & Christine Y Lu & Zaheer Ud-Din Babar, 2015. "Access to Orphan Drugs: A Comprehensive Review of Legislations, Regulations and Policies in 35 Countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-24, October.
    2. Mike Paulden & Tania Stafinski & Devidas Menon & Christopher McCabe, 2015. "Value-Based Reimbursement Decisions for Orphan Drugs: A Scoping Review and Decision Framework," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 255-269, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Viswanath Pingali & Neelima Das, 2021. "Rare Diseases Require Support Too," Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, , vol. 46(2), pages 129-134, June.
    2. Yeh‐Hsun Wu & Fan‐Ko Sun & Pei‐Yu Lee, 2020. "Family caregivers' lived experiences of caring for epidermolysis bullosa patients: A phenomenological study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(9-10), pages 1552-1560, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Degtiar, Irina, 2017. "A review of international coverage and pricing strategies for personalized medicine and orphan drugs," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(12), pages 1240-1248.
    2. Marialuisa Saviano & Sergio Barile & Francesco Caputo & Mattia Lettieri & Stefania Zanda, 2019. "From Rare to Neglected Diseases: A Sustainable and Inclusive Healthcare Perspective for Reframing the Orphan Drugs Issue," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-21, March.
    3. Jeff Round & Mike Paulden, 2018. "Incorporating equity in economic evaluations: a multi-attribute equity state approach," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(4), pages 489-498, May.
    4. Nicholas Bagley & Benjamin Berger & Amitabh Chandra & Craig Garthwaite & Ariel D. Stern, 2018. "The Orphan Drug Act at 35: Observations and an Outlook for the Twenty-First Century," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 19, pages 97-137, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Kleinhout-Vliek, Tineke & de Bont, Antoinette & Boer, Bert, 2017. "The bare necessities? A realist review of necessity argumentations used in health care coverage decisions," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(7), pages 731-744.
    6. Shiwei Gong & Dehe Li & Dong Dong, 2020. "How Do Patients and Doctors Perceive Medical Services for Rare Diseases Differently in China? Insights from Two National Surveys," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Norah L. Crossnohere & Ryan Fischer & Andrew Lloyd & Lisa A. Prosser & John F. P. Bridges, 2021. "Assessing the Appropriateness of the EQ-5D for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: A Patient-Centered Study," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 41(2), pages 209-221, February.
    8. Nicod, Elena & Annemans, Lieven & Bucsics, Anna & Lee, Anne & Upadhyaya, Sheela & Facey, Karen, 2019. "HTA programme response to the challenges of dealing with orphan medicinal products: Process evaluation in selected European countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 140-151.
    9. Dyfrig A Hughes & Jannine Poletti-Hughes, 2016. "Profitability and Market Value of Orphan Drug Companies: A Retrospective, Propensity-Matched Case-Control Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-12, October.
    10. Elena Nicod, 2017. "Why do health technology assessment coverage recommendations for the same drugs differ across settings? Applying a mixed methods framework to systematically compare orphan drug decisions in four Europ," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 18(6), pages 715-730, July.
    11. Samira Guennif, 2022. "Capture and passive predation in times of COVID-19 pandemic," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 193(3), pages 163-186, December.
    12. Erik Landfeldt & Josefin Edström & Cecilia Jimenez-Moreno & Baziel G. M. Engelen & Janbernd Kirschner & Hanns Lochmüller, 2019. "Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Adult-Onset Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1: A Systematic Review," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 12(4), pages 365-373, August.
    13. López-Bastida, J. & Ramos-Goñi, J.M. & Aranda-Reneo, I. & Trapero-Bertran, M. & Kanavos, P. & Rodriguez Martin, B., 2019. "Using a stated preference discrete choice experiment to assess societal value from the perspective of decision-makers in Europe. Does it work for rare diseases?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 152-158.
    14. Fontrier, Anna-Maria, 2022. "Market access for medicines treating rare diseases: Association between specialised processes for orphan medicines and funding recommendations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 306(C).
    15. Pejcic, Ana V. & Iskrov, Georgi & Jakovljevic, Mihajlo Michael & Stefanov, Rumen, 2018. "Access to orphan drugs – comparison across Balkan countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(6), pages 583-589.
    16. Se Hee Lee & Seung-Lai Yoo & Joon Seok Bang & Jong Hyuk Lee, 2020. "Patient Accessibility and Budget Impact of Orphan Drugs in South Korea: Long-Term and Real-World Data Analysis (2007–2019)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-8, April.
    17. Ria Christine Siagian & Dumilah Ayuningtyas, 2019. "Gap analysis for drug development policy-making: An attempt to close the gap between policy and its implementation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-13, August.
    18. Torrent-Farnell, J. & Comellas, M. & Poveda, J.L. & Abaitua, I. & Gutiérrez-Solana, L.G. & Pérez-López, J. & Cruz, J. & Urcelay, J. & Lizán, L., 2018. "The view of experts on initiatives to be undertaken to promote equity in the access to orphan drugs and specialised care for rare diseases in Spain: A Delphi consensus," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(6), pages 590-598.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0204206. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.