A systematic review of low back pain cost of illness studies in the United States and internationally
- PMID: 18164449
- DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2007.10.005
A systematic review of low back pain cost of illness studies in the United States and internationally
Abstract
Background context: The economic burden of low back pain (LBP) is very large and appears to be growing. It is not possible to impact this burden without understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the research on which these costs are calculated.
Purpose: To conduct a systematic review of LBP cost of illness studies in the United States and internationally.
Study design/setting: Systematic review of the literature.
Methods: Medline was searched to uncover studies about the direct or indirect costs of LBP published in English from 1997 to 2007. Data extracted for each eligible study included study design, population, definition of LBP, methods of estimating costs, year of data, and estimates of direct, indirect, or total costs. Results were synthesized descriptively.
Results: The search yielded 147 studies, of which 21 were deemed relevant; 4 other studies and 2 additional abstracts were found by searching reference lists, bringing the total to 27 relevant studies. The studies reported on data from Australia, Belgium, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, Sweden, the UK, and the United States. Nine studies estimated direct costs only, nine indirect costs only, and nine both direct and indirect costs, from a societal (n=18) or private insurer (n=9) perspective. Methodology used to derive both direct and indirect cost estimates differed markedly among the studies. Among studies providing a breakdown on direct costs, the largest proportion of direct medical costs for LBP was spent on physical therapy (17%) and inpatient services (17%), followed by pharmacy (13%) and primary care (13%). Among studies providing estimates of total costs, indirect costs resulting from lost work productivity represented a majority of overall costs associated with LBP. Three studies reported that estimates with the friction period approach were 56% lower than with the human capital approach.
Conclusions: Several studies have attempted to estimate the direct, indirect, or total costs associated with LBP in various countries using heterogeneous methodology. Estimates of the economic costs in different countries vary greatly depending on study methodology but by any standards must be considered a substantial burden on society. This review did not identify any studies estimating the total costs of LBP in the United States from a societal perspective. Such studies may be helpful in determining appropriate allocation of health-care resources devoted to this condition.
Similar articles
-
A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine and vinorelbine in non-small-cell lung cancer.Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(32):1-195. doi: 10.3310/hta5320. Health Technol Assess. 2001. PMID: 12065068
-
A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of topotecan for ovarian cancer.Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(28):1-110. doi: 10.3310/hta5280. Health Technol Assess. 2001. PMID: 11701100
-
Cost-effectiveness of using prognostic information to select women with breast cancer for adjuvant systemic therapy.Health Technol Assess. 2006 Sep;10(34):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-204. doi: 10.3310/hta10340. Health Technol Assess. 2006. PMID: 16959170
-
Home treatment for mental health problems: a systematic review.Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(15):1-139. doi: 10.3310/hta5150. Health Technol Assess. 2001. PMID: 11532236
-
Economic burden of urgency urinary incontinence in the United States: a systematic review.J Manag Care Pharm. 2014 Feb;20(2):130-40. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2014.20.2.130. J Manag Care Pharm. 2014. PMID: 24456314 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
The relationship between pain severity and patient-reported outcomes among patients with chronic low back pain in Japan.J Pain Res. 2016 Jun 2;9:337-44. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S102063. eCollection 2016. J Pain Res. 2016. PMID: 27330326 Free PMC article.
-
Cost-utility analysis of antibiotic treatment in patients with chronic low back pain and Modic changes: results from a randomised, placebo-controlled trial in Norway (the AIM study).BMJ Open. 2020 Jun 15;10(6):e035461. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035461. BMJ Open. 2020. PMID: 32546490 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Physician-Related Variability in the Outcomes of an Invasive Treatment for Neck and Back Pain: A Multi-Level Analysis of Data Gathered in Routine Clinical Practice.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Apr 7;18(8):3855. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18083855. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021. PMID: 33916951 Free PMC article.
-
A Description and Comparison of Treatments for Low Back Pain in the United States.Orthop Nurs. 2016 Jul-Aug;35(4):214-21. doi: 10.1097/NOR.0000000000000258. Orthop Nurs. 2016. PMID: 27441875 Free PMC article.
-
Disability and back muscle fatigability changes following two therapeutic exercise interventions in participants with recurrent low back pain.Med Sci Monit. 2013 Jan 14;19:40-8. doi: 10.12659/msm.883735. Med Sci Monit. 2013. PMID: 23314589 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous