The health-care utilization and economic burden in patients with genetic skeletal disorders

Most genetic skeletal disorders (GSD) were complex, disabling and life-threatening without effective diagnostic and treatment methods. However, its impacts on health system have not been well studied. The study aimed to systematically evaluate the health-care utilization and economic burden in GSD p...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:	Orphanet journal of rare diseases 2024-03, Vol.19 (1), p.99-99, Article 99
Hauptverfasser:	Liu, Luna, Shi, Yingzhou, Fan, Xiude, Yao, Yangyang, Wu, Wanhong, Tian, Yang, Wu, Huixiao, Li, Zongyue, Wang, Yanzhou, Xu, Chao
Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	eng
Schlagworte:	Abnormalities Achondroplasia Analysis Bone diseases Bones Chi-square test Codes Databases, Factual Economic aspects Economic burden Evaluation Financial Stress Genetic skeletal disorder Health care industry Health care policy Health Personnel Health system Health-Care utilization Hospitalization Hospitals Humans Inpatients Length of stay Medical care Medical care, Cost of Mutation Patient Acceptance of Health Care Patients Population Rare bone disease Rare diseases Utilization
Online-Zugang:	Volltext
Tags:	Tag hinzufügen Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!

Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:	Most genetic skeletal disorders (GSD) were complex, disabling and life-threatening without effective diagnostic and treatment methods. However, its impacts on health system have not been well studied. The study aimed to systematically evaluate the health-care utilization and economic burden in GSD patients. The patients were derived from 2018 Nationwide Inpatient Sample and Nationwide Readmissions Database. GSD patients were extracted based on International Classification of Diseases-10th revision codes. A total of 25,945 (0.12%) records regarding GSD were extracted from all 21,400,282 records in NIS database. GSD patients were likely to have significantly longer length of stay (6.50 ± 0.08 vs. 4.63 ± 0.002, P
ISSN:	1750-1172 1750-1172
DOI:	10.1186/s13023-024-03102-3