Back

Epidemiological Trends and Economic Burden of Genital Warts in Dutch Primary Care

Veijer, C.; Bes, J. M.; Dolk, F. C. K.; Postma, M. J.; de Jong, L. A.

2024-06-03 health economics
10.1101/2024.06.03.24307801 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThis study aims to describe the epidemiological trends and estimate the economic burden of genital warts (GW) in Dutch primary care. MethodsA retrospective, non-interventional, multiyear study (2011-2021) was performed using data from the Nivel Primary Care Database. Changes in incidence by age group, sex, and level of urbanisation of individuals with GW and associated healthcare resource use (general practitioner consultations, prescribed medication, and referrals) were estimated over the 11-year period. Total annual healthcare costs and cost per incident case were estimated via a bottom-up gross costing approach. ResultsBetween 2011 and 2021, GW incidence increased, which was especially seen in men (from 2.0 to 3.5 per 1 000 inhabitants) and to a lesser extent in women (from 1.9 to 2.1 per 1 000 inhabitants). GW incidence was most common in age group 20-29 years (men: 43.6%; women: 50.7%) and highly urbanised areas. Medication was prescribed in 61.4% of GW cases, and 5.4% of GW patients were referred to secondary care. Total costs in Dutch primary care increased by 108% from EUR 2.3 million in 2011 to EUR 4.9 million in 2021. The cost per incident case also showed an increasing trend from EUR 72 in 2011 to EUR 99 in 2021. Referrals to secondary care resulted in a 14-30% increase of total costs. ConclusionsThis study provides novel insights into recent epidemiological trends of GW and its associated costs in Dutch primary care. Incidence especially increased among men and total annual costs of GW in primary care doubled between 2011 and 2021.

Published in BMJ Public Health (predicted rank #4) · training set

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.