The direct and indirect costs associated with endometriosis: a systematic literature review

Study question: What is the economic burden of endometriosis?

Summary answer: The identified studies indicate that there is a significant economic burden associated with endometriosis, as observed by both direct and indirect costs.

What is known already: Two previous systematic literature reviews suggested that there were considerable direct costs associated with endometriosis and there was a general lack of measurement of indirect costs.

Study design, size, duration: We performed a systematic literature review. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from 2000 to 2013 were searched. The literature search was limited to human studies of patients with endometriosis. Papers in languages other than English were excluded.

Participants/materials, setting, methods: Studies reporting direct or indirect costs among patients with endometriosis were considered for inclusion. Direct costs included inpatient, outpatient, surgery, drug and other healthcare service cost. Indirect costs were related to absenteeism and presenteeism (lost productivity at work).

Main results and the role of chance: After evaluating the 1396 articles in the search results, 12 primary studies that reported direct or indirect costs associated with endometriosis were identified and included in the data extraction. Three of the studies were conducted in the USA, one study each was conducted in Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Finland, Germany and Italy, and two studies included data from 10 countries. Significant variability was observed in the reviewed studies in methodology, including data source, cost components considered and study perspective. Estimates of total direct costs ranged from $1109 per patient per year in Canada to $12 118 per patient per year in the USA. Indirect costs of endometriosis ranged from $3314 per patient per year in Austria to $15 737 per patient per year in the USA.

Limitations, reasons for caution: The studies identified in the systematic literature review varied greatly by study methodology as well as by country owing to different healthcare systems and costs of healthcare services, which contributed to large variations in the direct and indirect cost estimates.

Wider implications of the findings: A majority of the studies we found were published after the periods covered in the prior systematic literature reviews, which provided substantial contributions to an understanding of the economic burden of endometriosis, especially in the area of indirect costs. The long-term burden of endometriosis following diagnosis is still under-studied, which is a concern given the chronic nature of the disease and the substantial recurrence of endometriosis symptoms.

Study funding/competing interests: This study was funded by AbbVie, which also develops the oral GnRH antagonist elagolix (in collaboration with Neurocrine Biosciences) for the management of endometriosis and uterine fibroids. A.M.S. is an employee of AbbVie and currently owns AbbVie stocks. H.Y., E.X.D. and C.K. are employees of Analysis Group, Inc., which has received consultancy fees from AbbVie. C.W. is a Clinical Professor at the Department Obstetrics and Gynecology at Georgetown University in Washington, DC, USA and has served in a consulting role to AbbVie for this project.