Comparison of second-generation antipsychotic treatment on psychiatric hospitalization in Medicaid beneficiaries with bipolar disorder

Abstract

Objective:

To compare second-generation antipsychotics on time to and cost of psychiatric hospitalization in Medicaid beneficiaries with bipolar disorder.

Methods:

Retrospective study using healthcare claims from 10 US state Medicaid programs. Included beneficiaries were aged 18–64, initiated a single second-generation antipsychotic (aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, or ziprasidone) between 1/1/2003–6/30/2008 (initiation date?=?index), and had a medical claim with an ICD-9-CM diagnosis code for bipolar disorder. A 360-day post-index period was used to measure time to and costs of psychiatric hospitalization (inpatient claims with a diagnosis code for a mental disorder [ICD-9-CM 290.xx–319.xx] in any position). Cox proportional hazards models and Generalized Linear Models compared time to and costs of psychiatric hospitalization, respectively, in beneficiaries initiating aripiprazole vs each other second-generation antipsychotic, adjusting for beneficiaries’ baseline characteristics.

Results:

Included beneficiary characteristics: mean age 36 years, 77% female, 80% Caucasian, aripiprazole (n?=?2553), mean time to psychiatric hospitalization or censoring?=?85 days; olanzapine (n?=?4702), 81 days; quetiapine (n?=?9327), 97 days; risperidone (n?=?4377), 85 days; ziprasidone (n?=?1520), 82 days. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, time to psychiatric hospitalization in beneficiaries initiating aripiprazole was longer compared to olanzapine (hazard ratio [HR]?=?1.52, p?<?0.001), quetiapine (HR?=?1.40, p?<?0.001), ziprasidone (HR?=?1.33, p?=?0.032), and risperidone, although the latter difference did not reach significance (HR?=?1.18, p?=?0.13). The adjusted costs of psychiatric hospitalization in beneficiaries initiating aripiprazole were significantly lower compared to those initiating quetiapine (incremental per-patient per-month difference?=?$42, 95% CI?=?$16–66, p?<?0.05), but not significantly lower for the other comparisons.

Limitations:

This study was based on a non-probability convenience sample of the Medicaid population. Analyses of administrative claims data are subject to coding and classification error.

Conclusions:

Medicaid beneficiaries with bipolar disorder initiating aripiprazole had significantly longer time to psychiatric hospitalization than those initiating olanzapine, quetiapine, or ziprasidone, and significantly lower adjusted costs for psychiatric hospitalization than those initiating quetiapine.     

Treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization and costs in heavy menstrual bleeding: a Japanese claims database analysis

Aims: Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a highly prevalent condition, characterized by excessive menstrual blood loss and cramping, that interferes with activities of daily life. The aim of this study was to investigate treatment patterns in HMB in Japan, and to assess healthcare resource utilization and costs among women newly-diagnosed with the condition.

Materials and methods: This study retrospectively analyzed health insurance data available in the Japan Medical Data Center (JMDC) database on women aged 18–49 years who were newly-diagnosed with primary or secondary HMB. Treatment patterns were analyzed, and healthcare utilization and costs were evaluated and compared to matched controls.

Results: The study included a total of 635 patients, 210 with primary HMB and 425 with secondary HMB. In the primary HMB cohort, 60.0% of patients received one or more pharmacological or surgical treatments, compared with 76.2% in the secondary HMB cohort. The most commonly prescribed medications in all patients were hemostatic agents (28.7%), traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) (12.1%), and low-dose estrogen progestins (LEPs) (10.1%). After adjustment for patient baseline characteristics, healthcare costs were 1.93-times higher in primary HMB cases (p?<?.0001) and 4.44-times higher in secondary HMB cases (p?<?.0001) vs healthy controls. Outpatient care was the main cost driver.

Limitations: The main limitations of this study are related to its retrospective nature, and the fact that only reimbursed medications were captured in the source database.

Conclusions: A substantial proportion of HMB patients did not receive the recommended treatments. Healthcare costs were considerably increased in the presence of an HMB diagnosis.     

Clinical characteristics,pharmacotherapy, and healthcare resource use among patients with fibromyalgia newly prescribed pregabalin or tricyclic antidepressants

Abstract

Objective:

To examine treatment patterns and costs among patients with fibromyalgia prescribed pregabalin or tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs).

Methods:

Using the LifeLink? Health Plan Claims Database, patients with fibromyalgia (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification code 729.1X) newly prescribed (index date) TCAs (n?=?898) were identified and propensity score-matched (PSM) with patients newly prescribed pregabalin (n?=?898). Pain-related pharmacotherapy, comorbidities, and healthcare resource use/costs were examined during the 12 months, pre-index, and follow-up periods.

Results:

Both patient groups reported multiple comorbidities and received pain medications in the pre-index and follow-up periods. Among patients prescribed pregabalin, use of non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (43.3% vs 39.8%), other anticonvulsants (28.6% vs 23.3%), and tetracyclic/miscellaneous antidepressants (28.5% vs 25.8%) significantly decreased, and cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) inhibitors (7.7% vs 10.4%), TCAs (4.8% vs 7.9%), and topical agents (10.8% vs 15.1%) increased in the follow-up period (p?<?0.05). Among patients prescribed TCAs, there were significant decreases in muscle relaxants (42.0% vs 38.4%) and sedative hypnotics (27.4% vs 23.9%), and increases in COX-2 inhibitors (5.8% vs 7.9%) and anticonvulsants (25.1% vs 33.7%; p?<?0.05). There were increases (p?<?0.0001) in pharmacy costs in both cohorts and total healthcare costs in the pregabalin cohort from pre-index to follow-up. Median total costs were higher (p?<?0.05) in the pregabalin group vs TCAs in the pre-index ($9935 vs $8771) and follow-up ($10,689 vs $8379) periods.

Limitations:

Despite attempts to address bias through PSM, the higher pre-index costs in the pregabalin cohort suggest a channeling of patients with more severe fibromyalgia to pregabalin.

Conclusions:

Patients with fibromyalgia prescribed pregabalin or TCAs had multiple comorbidities and a sizeable pain medication burden, which increased in the follow-up period for both cohorts. Only 5% of pregabalin initiators had been treated with concomitant TCAs at baseline, suggesting that TCAs were inappropriate for these patients owing to their contraindications.     

Clinical comorbidities,treatment patterns,and direct medical costs of patients with osteoarthritis in usual care: a retrospective claims database analysis

Abstract

Objective:

Comorbidities and resource utilization among patients with osteoarthritis (OA) in clinical practice have been infrequently characterized. The purpose of this study was to examine comorbidities, pain-related pharmacotherapy, and direct medical costs of patients with OA in clinical practice.

Method:

This retrospective cohort analysis used medical and pharmacy claims data from the LifeLink? Database. OA patients (ICD-9-CM codes 715.XX) were matched (age, gender, and region) with individuals without OA. Comorbidities, pain-related pharmacotherapy, and direct medical costs (pharmacy, outpatient, inpatient, total) were examined for the calendar year 2008.

Results:

The sample consisted of 112,951 OA patients and 112,951 controls (mean age: 56.9 [SD?=?9.5] years; 62% female). Relative to controls, OA patients were significantly more likely (p?<?0.0001) to have comorbidities, including musculoskeletal (84.3 vs. 37.1%) and neuropathic pain (22.0 vs. 6.1%) conditions, depression (12.4 vs. 6.4%), anxiety (6.6 vs. 3.5%), and sleep disorders (11.9 vs. 4.2%). OA patients were significantly more likely (p?<?0.0001) to receive pain-related medications, including opioids (40.7 vs. 17.1%), NSAIDs (37.1 vs. 11.5%), tramadol (9.8 vs. 1.8%), and adjunctive medications for treating depression, anxiety, and insomnia. Mean [SD] total direct medical costs were more than two times higher among OA patients ($12,905 [$21,884] vs. $5099 [$13,855]; p?<?0.001) and median costs were more than three times higher ($6188 vs. $1879; p?<?0.0001). Study limitations include potential errors in coding and recording; overestimation of the comorbidity burden; inability to link condition of interest, OA, with prescribed medications; and possible underestimation of the true costs of OA, because indirect costs were not considered and the direct costs were from a third party payer (commercial insurance) perspective.

Conclusion:

The patient burden of OA was characterized by a high prevalence of comorbidities. The payer burden was also substantial, with significantly greater use of pain-related and adjunctive medications, and higher direct medical costs.     

Hospitalisation rates in patients switched from oral anti-psychotics to aripiprazole once-monthly for the management of schizophrenia

Abstract

Objective:

To report the design and preliminary results of a mirror-image study comparing total psychiatric hospitalisation rates pre- and post-switch to aripiprazole once-monthly, an extended release injectable solution.

Methods:

A multi-center, open-label mirror-image study of patients (18–65 years) with schizophrenia to compare total psychiatric hospitalisation rates between retrospective treatment with oral standard-of-care (SOC) anti-psychotics and prospective treatment with aripiprazole once-monthly in a naturalistic community setting in North America. Total psychiatric hospitalisation rates were assessed between retrospective (Months ?4 to ?1) and prospective treatment periods (Months 4–6) for patients who completed ≥3 months aripiprazole once-monthly.

Results:

One hundred and eighty-three patients entered the prospective phase. After switching to aripiprazole once-monthly, total psychiatric hospitalisation rates for the 3-month prospective period were significantly lower (p?<?0.0001, Exact McNemar’s test) compared with the retrospective 3-month period when the same patients received SOC anti-psychotics (6.6% [n?=?8/121] vs 28.1% [n?=?34/121], respectively; rate ratio?=?0.24). Similarly, total psychiatric hospitalisation rates for all patients who entered the prospective treatment phase were significantly lower (p?<?0.0001, Exact McNemar’s test) for the prospective 6 months following switch to aripiprazole once-monthly, compared with the retrospective 6-month SOC period (14.2% [n?=?26/183] vs 41.5% [n?=?76/183], respectively; rate ratio?=?0.34). Common treatment-emergent adverse events (occurring in ≥5% of patients) were psychotic disorder (7.7%), akathisia (7.2%), and insomnia (7.2%). Discontinuation (all causes) during the prospective phase was 44.8% (n?=?82/183).

Limitations:

Mirror-image studies do not include a parallel active control; as each patient serves as their own control, it cannot be determined whether other treatments may have similar effects. Treatment and trial effects may be difficult to separate. Independent factors such as admission patterns, insurance coverage, availability of hospital beds, and community support may influence rates of hospitalisation.

Conclusions:

Switching to aripiprazole once-monthly substantially reduced total psychiatric hospitalisation rates compared with retrospective rates in the same patients taking oral SOC.     

Healthcare resource utilization and costs associated with venous thromboembolism in cancer patients treated with anticoagulants

Abstract

Objective: The standard of care for cancer-related venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), but oral anticoagulants are also widely prescribed. This study compared VTE-related healthcare resource utilization and costs of cancer patients treated with anticoagulants.

Methods: Claims data from Humana Database (January 1, 2013–May 31, 2015) were analyzed. Based on the first anticoagulant received, patients were classified into LMWH, warfarin, or rivaroxaban cohorts. Characteristics were evaluated during the 6 months pre-index date (i.e. the first VTE); VTE-related resource utilization and costs were evaluated during follow-up. Cohorts were compared using rate ratios, and p-values and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Healthcare costs were evaluated per-patient-per-year (PPPY) and compared using mean cost differences.

Results: A total of 2,428 patients (LMWH: n?=?660; warfarin: n?=?1,061; rivaroxaban: n?=?707) were included. Compared to patients treated with LMWH, patients treated with rivaroxaban had significantly fewer VTE-related hospitalizations, hospitalization days, and emergency room and outpatient visits, resulting in an increase of $12,000 VTE-related healthcare costs PPPY with LMWH vs rivaroxaban. Patients treated with rivaroxaban had significantly lower VTE-related resource utilization compared to patients treated with warfarin; however, VTE-related costs were similar between cohorts. The higher drug costs ($1,519) were offset by significantly lower outpatient (?$1,039) and hospitalization costs (?$522) in rivaroxaban relative to the warfarin cohort.

Conclusions: Healthcare resource use and costs associated with VTE treatment in cancer patients are highest with LMWH relative to warfarin and rivaroxaban.     

Psychiatric inpatient cost of care before and after admission at a residential subacute step-up/step-down mental health facility

Background: Residential step-up/step-down services provide transitional care and reintegration into the community for individuals experiencing episodes of subacute mental illness. This study aims to examine psychiatric inpatient admissions, length of stay, and per capita cost of care following the establishment of a step-up/step-down Prevention And Recovery Care (PARC) facility in regional Australia.

Methods: This was a pragmatic before and after study set within a participatory action research methodology. The target sample comprised patients at a PARC facility over 15?months. Six-month individual level data prior to study entry, during, and over 6-months from study exit were examined using patient activity records. Costs were expressed in 2015–2016AU$.

Results: An audit included 192 people experiencing 243 episodes of care represented by males (58%), mean age?=?39.3 years (SD?=?12.7), primarily diagnosed with schizophrenia (48%) or mood disorders (30%). The cost of 1?day in a psychiatric inpatient unit was found to be comparable to an average of 5 treatment days in PARC; the mean cost difference per-bed day (AU$1,167) was associated with fewer and shorter inpatient stays. Reduced use of inpatient facility translated into an opportunity cost of improved patient flow equivalent to AU$12,555 per resident (bootstrapped 95% CI?=?$5,680–$19,280). More noticeable outcomes were observed among those who stayed in PARC for longer during index admission (r_s = 0.16, p?=?0.024), who have had more and lengthy inpatient stays (r_s = 0.52, p?r_s = 0.69, p?p?Conclusion: Efforts should be directed toward the adoption of cost-effective alternatives to psychiatric inpatient facilities that provide comparable or improved patient outcomes.     

Mail-order pharmacy use and medication adherence among Medicare Part D beneficiaries with diabetes

Abstract

Objective:

To examine medication adherence among Medicare Part D beneficiaries initiating oral anti-diabetic medications and explore whether there is any association of using mail-order pharmacy (vs. retail pharmacy) with better adherence in this patient population.

Research design and methods:

Using administrative pharmacy claims data, we conducted a retrospective cohort study on Medicare Part D beneficiaries who newly initiated oral anti-diabetic treatment between July 1, 2008 and December 31, 2008. Mail-order pharmacy users were matched to retail pharmacy users via propensity scoring, controlling for patient demographic and clinical characteristics. Adherence with oral anti-diabetic medications during the benefit year of 2009 was assessed using the proportion of days covered (PDC). Comparison of medication adherence between the mail-order pharmacy group and retail pharmacy group was conducted in the propensity matched sample using the paired t-tests and McNemar’s tests.

Results:

A total of 22,546 patients who initiated oral anti-diabetic medications were identified. The average PDC was 0.60 and only 41.6% of the study population attained good adherence (defined as PDC?≥?0.8) with oral anti-diabetic medications during calendar year 2009. The matched sample included 1361 patients in each of the mail-order and retail pharmacy cohorts. Compared with the retail pharmacy group, mail-order pharmacy users demonstrated a significantly higher PDC (0.68 vs. 0.61; P?<?0.001) throughout the benefit year. More patients in the mail-order pharmacy group (49.7%) attained good adherence with their oral anti-diabetic medications compared to 42.8% in the retail pharmacy group (P?<?0.001).

Limitations:

The study was subject to limitations inherent in retrospective claims database analysis.

Conclusions:

Adherence with oral anti-diabetic medications among Medicare Part D beneficiaries is suboptimal. Patients using mail-order pharmacy had better adherence to oral anti-diabetic medications than those who used retail pharmacies. However, the causal relationship between mail-order pharmacy use and adherence should be further examined in a randomized study setting.     

Treatment persistence in attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a retrospective analysis of patients initiated on lisdexamfetamine vs other medications

Abstract

Objective:

To compare treatment persistence in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) of patients initiated on lisdexamfetamine (LDX) vs other ADHD medications.

Methods:

A large US administrative claims database was used to select ADHD patients who initiated an ADHD medication (index treatment) during/after 2007. Patients were classified, based on age and previous treatment status, as treatment-naïve or previously treated children and adolescents (6–17 years) and treatment-naïve or previously treated adults (18 years and older). Furthermore, patients were classified into seven mutually exclusive treatment groups, based on their index treatment: LDX, atomoxetine (ATX), osmotic-release methylphenidate hydrochloride long-acting (OROS MPH), other methylphenidate/dexmethylphenidate short-acting (MPH SA) and long-acting (MPH LA), and amphetamine/dextroamphetamine short acting (AMPH SA) and long-acting (AMPH LA). Treatment persistence, analyzed through discontinuation (interruption of the index treatment for ≥30 consecutive days), was compared between treatment groups using multivariate Cox proportional hazards. Patients were followed until first treatment discontinuation or up to 12 months after the initiation of the index treatment, whichever occurred first.

Results:

Among children and adolescents, LDX patients had a significantly lower discontinuation rate compared to other treatment groups (range hazard ratios [HRs]; 1.04–2.26; all p?<?0.05), except when compared to treatment-naïve patients on ATX and OROS MPH, where no statistically significant differences were found and where LDX had a higher risk of discontinuation, respectively. Among adults, LDX patients had a significantly lower discontinuation rate compared to patients in other treatment groups (range HR; 1.14–1.86; all p?<?0.05), except for the comparison with AMPH LA patients, where differences were not statistically significant.

Limitations:

This study did not control for ADHD severity.

Conclusion:

LDX-treated patients were associated with higher persistence compared to patients initiated on other ADHD medications, except for the comparisons with OROS MPH and ATX treated patients in treatment-naïve children and adolescents and AMPH LA-treated patients in adults.     

Patient and parent preferences for immunoglobulin treatments: a conjoint analysis

Abstract

Objectives:

The purpose was to quantify patient and parent preferences for administration attributes of immunoglobulin (IG) treatments; and determine which administration attributes were most important to users of IG treatment and whether patients and parents have similar preferences for administration attributes.

Methods:

US adult patients and parents of children with a self-reported physician diagnosis of a primary immunodeficiency disorder completed a best-practice web-enabled choice-format conjoint survey that presented a series of 12 choice questions, each including a pair of hypothetical IG-treatment profiles. After reviewing current therapies, each profile was defined by mode of administration, frequency, location, number of needle sticks, and treatment duration. Before answering the choice questions, respondents were told to assume all treatments worked equally well. Choice questions were based on a D-efficient experimental design. Preference weights for attribute levels were estimated using random-parameters logit for each sample (adult patients and parents). Tests were performed to determine potential interactions among the administration attributes. All respondents provided online informed consent.

Results:

In total, 252 patients and 66 parents completed the choice questions appropriately. Overall, both groups preferred a home setting, monthly frequency, fewer needle sticks, and shorter treatment durations of IG treatment relative to alternative choices (p?<?0.05). Mode of administration was the least important attribute to both samples; however, parents strongly preferred self-administration to an appointment with a healthcare professional (p?<?0.05), whereas patients slightly preferred self-administration but were indifferent to the two modes.

Limitations:

Respondents evaluate hypothetical treatments and differences can arise between stated and actual choices.

Conclusions:

Considering the hypothetical treatments evaluated, IG treatments that provide the option of a home setting, monthly frequency, fewer needle sticks, and shorter treatment durations may address the needs of both patients and parents. Patients and parents have different preferences for administration attributes of IG treatments.