Economic outcomes of antipsychotic agents in a Medicaid population: traditional agents vs. risperidone.

Clinical trials reveal that the newer atypical antipsychotic agents are more effective and have fewer side effects than traditional agents. However, these newer agents have a higher acquisition cost than traditional agents. This study assessed the differential impact of risperidone and traditional agents on the total schizophrenia-related cost of care for Medicaid patients suffering from schizophrenia. This was a retrospective longitudinal pretest-posttest analysis of Medicaid claims data covering January 1992 to August 1996. Continuously eligible patients (n = 150) with a documented diagnosis of schizophrenia were evaluated. Medical claims were analyzed for patients treated with traditional antipsychotics for at least 12 months and then switched to risperidone and followed for at least 12 months. Patients who failed on at least one traditional agent and who remained on other traditional agents throughout the study timeframe served as a control group. Monthly costs per patient were estimated using mixed model linear regression with age and gender serving as covariates. The total monthly costs per patient for the risperidone and traditional cohorts were similar ($1,050.52 and $946.24, respectively; p = .5438) during the pretest phase of the study. For patients treated with risperidone, drug costs were $177.35 higher (CL0.95 +/- $7.64; p = .0001) per patient per month in the posttest period compared with the pretest period. However inpatient hospital costs were $312.04 lower (CL0.95 +/- $146.76; p = .001) per patient per month in the posttest period compared with the pretest period. In addition, physician costs were $9.55 lower (CL0.95 +/- $5.31; p = .0004) per patient per month in the posttest period. The difference from the pretest to posttest period for outpatient mental health clinic costs was statistically similar. For those in the risperidone cohort, total estimated costs decreased by $204.87 per patient per month during treatment with risperidone (CL0.95 +/- $161.01; p = .0127). Over the same time-frame, total costs increased $160.68 per patient per month (CL0.95 +/- $196.04; n.s.; p = .1082) in the control cohort. While the mean monthly drug cost was significantly higher during treatment with risperidone, this increase was offset by cost reductions elsewhere in the system.

Economic outcomes associated with the use of risperidone in a naturalistic group practice setting.

The purpose of this cohort pilot study was to compare the resource utilization and economic outcomes associated with the use of risperidone versus haloperidol in a naturalistic setting. Patient charts from a large psychiatric group practice were reviewed, and hospital billing data were obtained. Patients meeting the inclusion criteria were placed into one of two cohorts depending on their medication history. Thirty patients treated with risperidone met the selection criteria, and a random quota sampling technique was used to allow for a matched control cohort of 30 patients treated with haloperidol. In the haloperidol and risperidone cohorts, 24 and 28 patients, respectively, were evaluated statistically. Mean utilization rates and costs per patient per month for each service were estimated by using regression analysis. Patients in the risperidone cohort had significantly fewer hospitalizations than did those in the haloperidol cohort (P = 0.004). Likewise, risperidone patients had significantly lower hospitalization costs than haloperidol patients (P = 0.005). Conversely, patients treated with risperidone visited the physician more frequently than did those treated with haloperidol (P = 0.0005). Estimated mean total monthly costs were $123.34 lower (95% confidence interval = $464, $217) per patient in the risperidone cohort than in the haloperidol cohort ($1,636.11 vs $1759.45; P = 0.4693). Significant reductions in hospital costs in the risperidone cohort offset higher medication and physician costs. Overall, total monthly costs were similar for the two cohorts.

Prenatal use of medications by women giving birth at a university hospital.

Medication use during pregnancy has changed over time because of various factors: new products have been marketed, concerns have arisen regarding safety and efficacy, public education has increased, and some prescription medications have been granted nonprescription status by the Food and Drug Administration. The purpose of this investigation was to determine overall medication and substance use by prenatal patients whose infants were delivered at our tertiary university hospital. Within 96 hours after delivery, 100 women were evaluated by a personal interview and medical record review. The medications most commonly used during pregnancy were vitamins, analgesics, calcium and iron preparations, and antibiotics. The mean numbers of medications consumed during the second and third trimesters (3.32 +/- 1.87 and 4.13 +/- 2.46) were significantly higher than the mean number taken before pregnancy (2.65 +/- 1.95). Over-the-counter medications accounted for 54% of the total products taken during pregnancy. Percentages of women using caffeine, tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drugs decreased during pregnancy.

Quantifying the clinical significance of drug-drug interactions: scaling pharmacists' perceptions of a common interaction classification scheme.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a precise, interval level scale of the clinical significance of drug-drug interactions that reflects the professional judgments of practicing pharmacists. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of 63 practicing pharmacists representing hospital (clinical and staff) and retail (chain and independent) practice settings. METHOD: Pharmacists judged the similarity among 15 interaction categories that have been commonly used to classify drug-drug interactions. A multidimensional scaling technique produced a spatial representation (i.e., a psychological map) of the structure inherent in those similarity judgments. Pharmacists' ratings of clinical significance were projected onto that same spatial representation using a multiple regression procedure, and the resulting information was used to develop a scale of clinical significance. RESULTS: The clinical significance scale developed from pharmacists' judgments was substantially different from a comparison scale published in a popular reference. The new scale was more precise than the comparison scale, and it also approximated an interval level of measurement. The judgments used to produce the new clinical significance scale were not reliably influenced by pertinent demographic characteristics of the sample. CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistencies between published clinical significance scales and the professional judgments of practitioners could affect patient care to the degree that a summary measure of clinical significance affects a practitioner's response to a potential drug-drug interaction. The clinical significance scale developed in this study has good measurement characteristics and reflects the professional judgments of practicing pharmacists. Use of the new scale is recommended on these grounds, although further assessment of its generality is warranted.

Strontium chloride Sr 89 for treating pain from metastatic bone disease.

The role of strontium chloride Sr 89 in the palliative treatment of pain associated with metastatic bone disease is reviewed. Conventional therapies to relieve metastatic bone pain include nonopioid and opioid analgesics, hormonal therapy, external-beam irradiation, and chemotherapy. Limitations in the long-term safety and effectiveness of these treatments have increased interest in using systemic radioactive isotopes for palliation of pain. Strontium chloride Sr 89 is a relatively new bone-seeking radiopharmaceutical that has FDA-approved labeling for use in relieving pain associated with skeletal metastases. An analogue of calcium, strontium chloride Sr 89 is rapidly cleared from the blood after i.v. injection. The agent selectively irradiates metastatic sites while generally sparing normal soft-bone tissue. In clinical studies, a majority of patients with prostate or breast cancer obtained substantial relief from bone pain after receiving strontium chloride Sr 89 alone or in combination with external-beam irradiation. Adverse effects tend to be mild, but patients should be monitored for possible hematologic toxicity. Patients should discontinue any calcium-containing products before receiving the agent. The typical dose is 4 mCi (148 MBq) administered by slow i.v. push over one to two minutes; doses can be repeated at three-month intervals. Pain relief usually begins in 10-20 days and lasts up to six months. Radiation safety measures are necessary in handling strontium chloride Sr 89 and the wastes of patients. Strontium chloride Sr 89 is costly, but preliminary analysis indicates that it may reduce management expenditures overall.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Economic impact of cost-containment strategies in third party programmes in the US (part I).

The rising cost of healthcare has strained the resources of governments, private third parties and individuals with responsibility to pay for it. Various strategies have been used in an attempt to control costs. This article examines the economic impact of 4 such strategies: (a) cost sharing; (b) prescription limits; (c) rebates; and (d) cost limits. Cost sharing has been successful at reducing utilisation of prescription drugs, although the effects have not been uniform across therapeutic categories. However, the long term effect on cost and utilisation of other medical services, and the impact on overall health status, remain largely unknown. Some evidence suggests that utilisation of other services may increase. The available data regarding drug rebate programmes have been descriptive in nature. However, the designs employed in this research do not establish a direct causal relationship between rebate programmes and changes in Medicaid drug expenditure. Furthermore, still unknown is the degree of cost shifting and the effect of the rebate programme on other large public and private drug purchasers. The Maximum Allowable Cost programme led to direct savings in drug costs, but the size of these savings was variable and uncertain because of administrative costs of the programme. The Estimated Acquisition Cost programme has not resulted in significant savings.

The financial impact of OBRA-90 on community pharmacies: an overview.

The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA-90) may be the most significant piece of legislation affecting the practice of pharmacy since the Durham-Humphrey amendments to the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. As part of the OBRA-90 legislation, the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) was required to publish estimates of the impact of the act on states, Medicaid recipients, and pharmacies. Numerous stakeholders and researchers have commented on the HCFA estimates. We have summarized the estimates available in comments and studies and conducted a sensitivity analysis on these estimates. Our results demonstrate considerable variation in the factors important in estimating the impact of OBRA-90 on pharmacy operations. This variation indicates the scarcity of empirical data needed to produce reliable impact estimates. Demonstration projects are needed to scientifically evaluate the total impact of OBRA-90 on pharmacy practice. Moreover, further investigation of the impact of the legislation on program recipients and states is warranted.