Cost effectiveness of olanzapine in prevention of affective episodes in bipolar disorder in the United Kingdom

This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of olanzapine compared with lithium as maintenance therapy for patients with bipolar I disorder (BP1) in the UK. A Markov model was developed to assess costs and outcomes from the perspective of the UK National Health Service over a 1-year period. Patients enter the model after stabilization of a manic episode and are then treated with olanzapine or lithium. Using the findings of a recent randomized clinical trial, the model considers the monthly risk of manic or depressive episodes and of dropping out from allocated therapy. health care resources associated with acute episodes were derived primarily from a recent UK chart review. Costs of maintenance therapy and monitoring were also considered. Key factors influencing cost effectiveness were identified and included in a stochastic sensitivity analysis. The model estimated that, compared to lithium, olanzapine significantly reduced the annual number of acute mood episodes per patient from 0.81 to 0.58 (difference -0.23; 95% CI: -0.34, -0.12). Per patient average annual care costs fell by 799 UK pounds (95% CI: - 1,824 UK pounds, 59 UK pounds) driven by reduced inpatient days--but the cost difference was not statistically significant. Sensitivity analysis found the results to be robust to plausible variation in the model's parameters. The model estimated that using olanzapine instead of lithium as maintenance therapy for BP1 would significantly reduce the rate of acute mood events resulting in reduced hospital costs. Based on available evidence, there is a high likelihood that olanzapine would reduce costs of care compared to lithium.

Service utilization and associated direct costs for bipolar disorder in 2004: an analysis in managed care

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder is a chronic and costly condition. This analysis examines health care costs associated with bipolar disorder in 2004 and contrasts them with those for depression, a better understood mental illness.

METHODS

Health care costs associated with bipolar disorder and non-bipolar depression were determined using private payer administrative claims. Individuals having 2 claims with a primary ICD-9-CM code for bipolar disorder or depression were categorized as bipolar disorder or non-bipolar depression patients, respectively. Comparisons between patient groups were adjusted for demographic differences and comorbid diagnoses.

RESULTS

On average, bipolar patients (n=6072) used significantly more psychiatric resources per person than depression patients (n=60,643), and had more mean psychiatric hospital days, psychiatric and medical emergency room visits, and psychiatric office visits (p<.001 for all). Bipolar patients were slightly less likely to be treated with antidepressants, but substantially more likely to be treated with antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, lithium, and benzodiazepines (p<.001 for all). Mean direct per-patient costs were $10,402 for bipolar patients and $7494 for depression patients (p<.001), with the primary differences observed for psychiatric medication ($1641 vs. $507) and psychiatric hospitalization ($1187 vs. $241).

LIMITATIONS

Patients were categorized based on diagnostic codes in administrative claims data, which may not always be accurate. Results may not generalize beyond private payer populations in the US.

CONCLUSIONS

Bipolar disorder is associated with significantly greater per-patient total annual health care costs than non-bipolar depression, as well as significantly greater psychiatric costs. Bipolar disorder, a chronic condition often suboptimally treated, may represent a good target for disease-management programs.

Prevalence and correlates of burden among caregivers of patients with bipolar disorder enrolled in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder

OBJECTIVES

Caring for a relative with schizophrenia or dementia is associated with reports of high caregiver burden, symptoms of depression, poor physical health, negligence of the caregiver's own health needs, elevated health service use, low use of social supports, and financial strain. This study presents the design and preliminary data on the costs and consequences of caring for a relative or friend with bipolar disorder from the Family Experience Study, a longitudinal study of the primary caregivers to 500 patients enrolled in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder.

METHODS

Subjects were primary caregivers of 500 patients with bipolar disorder diagnosed by the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview and the Affective Disorder Evaluation. Caregivers were evaluated within 1 month after patients entered Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program using measures of burden, coping, health/mental health, and use of resources and costs.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine percent, 52%, and 61% of caregivers, respectively, experienced moderate or higher burden in relation to patient problem behaviors, role dysfunction, or disruption of household routine. High burden caregivers reported more physical health problems, depressive symptoms, health risk behavior and health service use, and less social support than less burden caregivers. They also provided more financial support to their bipolar relative.

CONCLUSIONS

Burdens experienced by family caregivers of people with bipolar disorder are associated with problems in health, mental health, and cost. Psychosocial interventions targeting the strains of caregiving for a patient with bipolar disorder are needed.

Employee costs before and after treatment initiation for bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

To examine pretreatment and posttreatment total medical costs and overall mental healthcare costs for patients with bipolar disorder (BPD) treated with different medication regimens (alone and in combination) vs an untreated (UnTx) cohort.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective employer-based administrative database analysis of costs before and after the start of therapy for BPD from 2001 through 2004.

METHODS

Patients were grouped into 3 cohorts based on type of therapy vs the UnTx cohort. Total medical and mental health-specific healthcare costs were compared between the 6-month preindex period and the 6-month postindex period. A mean index date of the treated cohorts was assigned to the UnTx cohort. Regression models were used to calculate cost differences.

RESULTS

Reductions in direct medical costs among 1284 patients were largest for the cohort receiving atypical antipsychotics (ATYP) only (-$2886 [n = 55]), followed by the UnTx cohort (-$365 [n = 306]) and the cohort receiving ATYP plus other BPD medications (BOTH) (-$78 [n = 369]). In the cohort receiving other BPD medications (OTHR), costs increased by $168 (n = 554). Differences between the ATYP cohort and the OTHR cohort were significant (P = .04). For specific direct mental health-related costs, the cost changes were -$1523 for the ATYP cohort, -$441 for the OTHR cohort, -$38 for the BOTH cohort, and -$704 for the UnTx cohort. Differences between the ATYP cohort and the OTHR and BOTH cohorts were significant (P = .02 and P = .002, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients using ATYP for BPD seem to have the largest cost reductions. Additional investigation is needed to identify whether the UnTx cohort had the least severe BPD, had nonadherent prescription fill behavior, or both.

Working, receiving disability benefits, and access to mental health care in individuals with bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the extent to which people in a bipolar disorder (BPD) registry were working, factors associated with working and obtaining disability benefits, and the impact disability benefits have on work.

METHODS

We compared the socio-demographic, disease, treatment, and health insurance characteristics among three work disability groups - working, not working, and not working and receiving disability benefits - using a chi-square statistical test on categorical data, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare means, and a Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric test of significance with skewed data.

RESULTS

Among 1,855 individuals, 49.4% reported they were working. Those working were younger, more frequently self-identified as Caucasian, were more highly educated, had a higher income, were more often married, had a shorter duration of illness, and reported the shortest illness duration, the lowest percentage of suicide attempts, and manic and mixed or rapid symptoms in the past 6 months compared to the two non-working groups. Working individuals least often reported receiving electroconvulsive therapy and being hospitalized and had the longest median duration since last hospitalization and the lowest percentage with treatment in the past 6 months. They were currently likelier to be treated by a primary care physician or other health professional than a psychiatrist compared to non-working groups. Finally, compared to the non-working groups, the working group had the highest percentage with no health insurance and private health insurance, the highest percentage using managed care, and the lowest percent under a fee-for-service plan. All work disability groups had similar perceptions of their mental health care plan in terms of the number of doctors or clinics from which to choose, the location of their health care providers, and the quality of mental health care. Those in the working group were least satisfied with the range of mental health services provided in their health plan.

CONCLUSIONS

Disability benefits are rarely awarded when a person is working. Moreover, receipt of disability benefits increases the likelihood that a person with BPD will be receiving health care benefits and, in many cases, those benefits provide greater access to treatment compared to health care insurance received through an employer. We conclude that the incentives to work run counter to access to treatment among people with BPD.

Bipolar disorders in Australia. A population-based study of excess costs

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the excess costs associated with bipolar disorders in Australia, based on prevalence (using the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ)) and associated excess burden-of-illness costs.

METHODS

Using data from the 2004 South Australian Health Omnibus Survey (HOS), a weighted cross-sectional survey of 3,015 adults, excess costs were estimated from health service utilisation.

RESULTS

There was a 2.5% lifetime prevalence of bipolar disorders, delineated by the MDQ. Those persons (MDQ positive) reported a significantly greater use of services and a poorer health status and quality of life than those who were MDQ negative. Using the service provision perspective, excess costs of bipolar disorders in Australia were approx $3.97-$4.95 billion.

CONCLUSIONS

These results from an Australian population demonstrate the significant economic burden of bipolar disorders. Our findings emphasise the need for further evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of different treatments, or alternative means of reducing the burden borne by individuals, the health system and the general community.

The impact of unrecognized bipolar disorders among patients treated for depression with antidepressants in the fee-for-services California Medicaid (Medi-Cal) program: a 6-year retrospective analysis

INTRODUCTION

The cost of unrecognized bipolar disorders over time is unknown.

METHODS

Ten years of data from the California Medicaid program were used to identify depressed patients initiating new episodes of antidepressant therapy and with 6+ years of post-treatment data. Recognized bipolar (RBP) patients received a BP diagnosis or used mood stabilizers in the pre-index period. Unrecognized bipolar (UBP) patients received an initial BP diagnosis or used a mood stabilizer in the post-index period. Depression-only (MDD) patients had no BP diagnosis or mood stabilizer use. Three analyses were conducted: (1) regression models of cost per year, (2) a regression model of aggregate cost over 6 years and (3) a time trend analysis of the costs for UBP patients.

RESULTS

14,809 patients were identified: RBP 14.5%, UBP 28.2% and MDD 57.3%. The growth in costs per month for UBP patients over 6 years (171%) far exceeds the growth for RBP and MDD patients (82% and 95%, respectively). RBP and MDD patients cost 2316 dollars and 1681 dollars less per year in the 6th year relative to UBP patients (p<0.0001 for both estimates). The cost per month increased by 91 dollars for each month of delayed diagnosis (p=0.011). Costs for UBP patients increased by 10 dollars per month prior to their initial BP diagnosis (p<0.001) and by -1.01 dollars thereafter (p=0.006 for the change in slope).

LIMITATIONS

Classification of patients based on diagnosis or mood stabilizer use using paid claims data is inexact.

CONCLUSIONS

Early diagnosis of bipolar disorders may significantly reduce health care cost.

First psychiatric hospitalizations in the US military: the National Collaborative Study of Early Psychosis and Suicide (NCSEPS)

BACKGROUND

Military samples provide an excellent context to systematically ascertain hospitalization for severe psychiatric disorders. The National Collaborative Study of Early Psychosis and Suicide (NCSEPS), a collaborative study of psychiatric disorders in the US Armed Forces, estimated rates of first hospitalization in the military for three psychiatric disorders: bipolar disorder (BD), major depressive disorder (MDD) and schizophrenia.

METHOD

First hospitalizations for BD, MDD and schizophrenia were ascertained from military records for active duty personnel between 1992 and 1996. Rates were estimated as dynamic incidence (using all military personnel on active duty at the midpoint of each year as the denominator) and cohort incidence (using all military personnel aged 18-25 entering active duty between 1992 and 1996 to estimate person-years at risk).

RESULTS

For all three disorders, 8723 hospitalizations were observed in 8,120,136 person-years for a rate of 10.7/10,000 [95% confidence interval (CI) 10.5-11.0]. The rate for BD was 2.0 (95% CI 1.9-2.1), for MDD, 7.2 (95% CI 7.0-7.3), and for schizophrenia, 1.6 (95% CI 1.5-1.7). Rates for BD and MDD were greater in females than in males [for BD, rate ratio (RR) 2.0, 95% CI 1.7-2.2; for MDD, RR 2.9, 95% CI 2.7-3.1], but no sex difference was found for schizophrenia. Blacks had lower rates than whites of BD (RR 0.8, 95% CI 0.7-0.9) and MDD (RR 0.8, 95% CI 0.8-0.9), but a higher rate of schizophrenia (RR 1.5, 95% CI 1.3-1.7).

CONCLUSIONS

This study underscores the human and financial burden that psychiatric disorders place on the US Armed Forces.

Economics of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar disorder: a review of the literature

Economic evaluations are increasingly being used by policy makers to evaluate the relative costs and benefits of healthcare interventions. These analyses provide economic and clinical evidence to decision makers seeking to make recommendations on treatment alternatives for patients. This article describes the economic evidence on the atypical antipsychotics currently approved for the treatment of bipolar disorder. This area remains under-researched. A literature search identified only six relevant studies of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar disorder: two retrospective database analyses, three economic analyses alongside clinical trials and one cost-effectiveness analysis. Based on the limited available studies, there appears to be no significant difference in healthcare resource use between olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone and valproate semisodium (divalproex sodium; an antiepileptic drug and a standard treatment for mania associated with bipolar disorder). While a cost-effectiveness study for the UK found haloperidol (a conventional antipsychotic) to be more cost effective than atypical antipsychotics, these results must be considered with caution because of the non-inclusion of adverse effects in the model. No economic data are available for aripiprazole, clozapine or ziprasidone in bipolar disorder. Until more economic evidence becomes available, the economic implications of atypical antipsychotic treatment in patients with bipolar disorder are unlikely to significantly impact on prescribing and treatment patterns. Future economic studies evaluating atypical antipsychotics in bipolar disorder should address the issue of long-term costs and effectiveness to reflect the chronic nature of the disease, the variety of health states that patients may experience and the range of treatments they may receive. A better understanding of the complex interplay between effectiveness, safety, quality of life, adherence and resource use should ultimately contribute to improving the treatment of bipolar disorder.

Prevalence and effects of mood disorders on work performance in a nationally representative sample of U.S. workers

OBJECTIVE

Research on the workplace costs of mood disorders has focused largely on major depressive episodes. Bipolar disorder has been overlooked both because of the failure to distinguish between major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder and by the failure to evaluate the workplace costs of mania/hypomania.

METHOD

The National Comorbidity Survey Replication assessed major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder with the World Health Organization (WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) and work impairment with the WHO Health and Work Performance Questionnaire. A regression analysis of major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder predicting Health and Work Performance Questionnaire scores among 3,378 workers was used to estimate the workplace costs of mood disorders.

RESULTS

A total of 1.1% of the workers met CIDI criteria for 12-month bipolar disorder (I or II), and 6.4% meet criteria for 12-month major depressive disorder. Bipolar disorder was associated with 65.5 and major depressive disorder with 27.2 lost workdays per ill worker per year. Subgroup analysis showed that the higher work loss associated with bipolar disorder than with major depressive disorder was due to more severe and persistent depressive episodes in those with bipolar disorder than in those with major depressive disorder rather than to stronger effects of mania/hypomania than depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Employer interest in workplace costs of mood disorders should be broadened beyond major depressive disorder to include bipolar disorder. Effectiveness trials are needed to study the return on employer investment of coordinated programs for workplace screening and treatment of bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder.

The economic impact of bipolar disorder in an employed population from an employer perspective

OBJECTIVE

To determine the economic impact of bipolar disorder on health benefit costs and health-related work absences from an employer perspective.

METHOD

Data on health benefit costs and health-related absences during 2001 and 2002 were retrieved from a database and retrospectively examined. Regression modeling measured the cost differences while controlling for potentially confounding factors. The study population consisted of employees at multiple large employers who were widely dispersed throughout the United States. These employees were grouped into 2 cohorts: (1) employees with a bipolar disorder diagnosis (primary, secondary, or tertiary ICD-9 code of 296.0x, 296.1x, 296.4x, 296.5x, 296.6x, 296.7x, or 296.8x) in 2001 and (2) employees with no bipolar disorder diagnosis during 2001 or 2002 (comparison cohort). Specific outcome measures included annual health benefit claim costs and salary-replacement payments for the following employee health benefits: health care insurance, prescription drug, sick leave, short- and long-term disability, and workers' compensation. Additional outcome measures included annual absence days due to workers' compensation, short- and long-term disability, and sick leave (separately).

RESULTS

The analysis identified 761 employees (0.3%) with bipolar disorder and 229,145 eligible employees without bipolar disorder. Employees with bipolar disorder annually cost $6836 more than employees without bipolar disorder (p < .05) and were more costly in every health benefit cost category. Employees with bipolar disorder missed an average of 18.9 workdays annually, while employees without bipolar disorder missed 7.4 days annually (p < .05).

CONCLUSION

The impact of bipolar disorder can be costly in the workplace, leading to increased health benefit costs and increased absenteeism.

Collaborative care for bipolar disorder: Part II. Impact on clinical outcome, function, and costs

OBJECTIVE

The study addressed whether a collaborative model for chronic care, described in part I (this issue), improves outcome for bipolar disorder.

METHODS

The intervention was designed to improve outcome by enhancing patient self-management skills with group psychoeducation; providing clinician decision support with simplified practice guidelines; and improving access to care, continuity of care, and information flow via nurse care coordinators. In an effectiveness design veterans with bipolar disorder at 11 Veterans Affairs hospitals were randomly assigned to three years of care in the intervention or continued usual care. Blinded clinical and functional measures were obtained every eight weeks. Intention-to-treat analysis (N=306) with mixed-effects models addressed the hypothesis that improvements would accrue over three years, consistent with social learning theory.

RESULTS

The intervention significantly reduced weeks in affective episode, primarily mania. Broad-based improvements were demonstrated in social role function, mental quality of life, and treatment satisfaction. Reductions in mean manic and depressive symptoms were not significant. The intervention was cost-neutral while achieving a net reduction of 6.2 weeks in affective episode.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaborative chronic care models can improve some long-term clinical outcomes for bipolar disorder. Functional and quality-of-life benefits also were demonstrated, with most benefits accruing in years 2 and 3.

Collaborative care for bipolar disorder: part I. Intervention and implementation in a randomized effectiveness trial

Outcome for bipolar disorder remains suboptimal despite the availability of efficacious treatments. To improve treatment effectiveness in clinical practice, a Veterans Affairs study team created a care model conceptually similar to the lithium clinics of the 1970s but augmented by principles of more recent collaborative care models for chronic medical illnesses. This intervention consists of improving patients' self-management skills through psychoeducation; supporting providers' decision making through simplified practice guidelines; and enhancing access to care, continuity of care, and information flow through the use of a nurse care coordinator. In this article, which is part I of a two-part report, the authors summarize the conceptual background and development of the intervention, describe the design of a three-year, 11-site randomized effectiveness trial, and report data describing its successful implementation. Trial design emphasized aspects of effectiveness to support generalizability of the findings and eventual dissemination of the intervention. Part II (see companion article, this issue) reports clinical, functional, and overall cost outcomes of the trial.

Modeling costs and burden of informal caregiving for persons with bipolar disorder

BACKGROUND

Informal caregiving contributes significantly to the health and well being of chronically ill persons. While a vast literature demonstrates this connection, the cost and financial burden of informal caregiving has received considerably less research attention, especially as it-pertains to bipolar disorder.

AIMS OF THE STUDY

This paper develops an integrated burden model of informal caregiving, which is contrasted with other more traditional models of caregiving costs, and then uses these models to estimate the financial burden of bipolar disorder. The "goodness" of these various models is measured in terms of their correlation with measures of objective and subjective burden for caregivers of persons with bipolar disorder.

METHODS

The study was an ancillary protocol to the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD) and included primary caregivers of 500 people with bipolar disorder. Approximately 96% (n=486) caregivers participated in the study. Caregivers were interviewed at baseline, and six and 12 months after an initial interview. The semi-structured interview included questions on (i) subjective distress; (ii) the types of support and services; (iii) caregiver use of formal and informal services and support; and (iv) contributions received from the relative with bipolar over the past month.

RESULTS

The correlations between financial burden and psychological burden measures were positive and statistically significant in cases where all resource costs were measured but adjusted for reciprocated giving and customary generosity (the integrated model). The strength of correlations was greater when time is valued at its opportunity cost (and not imputed) and the caregiving costs based on this valuation approach were logarithmically transformed.

DISCUSSION

The magnitude of the correlations is consistent with the notion that caregiver burden is a coherent construct with multiple different dimensions. Financial burden appears to be a unique dimension that is significantly intercorrelated with psychological measures but is not redundant with them. The robustness of these findings need to be tested with larger samples and across caregiver illness groups.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE

Caregiving is likely to have health and stress-related consequences that increase caregiving costs. Understanding which costs are associated with feelings of burden can be used to inform the design of interventions to minimize the stressful or burdensome aspects of caregiving. Giving back reduces the magnitude of caregiving costs and the sense of psychological burden. Interventions that develop the potential to "give back" are likely to be beneficial for both the caregiver and the care receiver as it increases reciprocity and decreases dependency.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

Caution is needed in estimating the costs of informal caregiving needs as many costs are possible but their relationship to burden varies in strength and significance. Assumptions related to what is given and received and how this relates to expected patterns of giving and receiving in measuring and determining financial burden and costs are particularly important, as is the valuation of time.

Psychiatric comorbidity in older adults with bipolar disorder

INTRODUCTION

Comorbidity patterns and correlates among older adults with bipolar disorder (BPD) are not well understood. The aim of this analysis was to examine the prevalence of comorbid PTSD and other anxiety disorders, substance abuse and dementia in a population of 16,330 geriatric patients with BPD in a Veterans Health Administration administrative database.

METHODS

Patients were identified from case registry files during Federal Fiscal Year 2001(FY01). Comorbidity groups were compared on selected clinical characteristics, inpatient and outpatient health resource use, and costs of care.

RESULTS

Four thousand six hundred and sixty-eight geriatric veterans with BPD were comorbid for either substance abuse, PTSD and other anxiety disorder, or dementia (28.6% of all veterans with BPD age 60 or older). Mean age of all veterans in the four comorbidity groups was 70.0 years (+/-SD 7.2 years). Substance abuse was seen in 1,460 (8.9%) of elderly veterans with BPD, while PTSD was seen in 875 (5.4%), other anxiety disorders in 1592 (9.7%), and dementia in 741 (4.5%) of elderly veterans. Individuals with substance abuse in this elderly bipolar population are more likely to be younger, minority, unmarried and homeless compared to elderly bipolar populations with anxiety disorders or dementia. Inpatient use was greatest among geriatric veterans with BPD and dementia compared to veterans with BPD and other comorbid conditions.

CONCLUSION

Clinical characteristics, health resource use and healthcare costs differ among geriatric patients with BPD and comorbid anxiety, substance abuse or dementia. Additional research is needed to better understand presentation of illness and modifiable factors that may influence outcomes.

The cost-effectiveness of lamotrigine in the maintenance treatment of adults with bipolar I disorder

OBJECTIVE

To present an economic model and cost-effectiveness estimates for lamotrigine in maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder (BD-I) using outcomes from the pivotal lamotrigine trials. The main comparator treatments in the pivotal trials were lithium and .no maintenance. (acute-only) treatment. A comparison with olanzapine was included as an indirect analysis following publication of data during the course of our research.

METHODS

A Markov model was built around the 3 health states of euthymia, mania, and depression. The base-case model simulates a cohort of 1,000 patients with BD-I who have recently stabilized after resolution of a bipolar mania episode. The cohort was modeled for a period of 18 months. Resource-use estimates were derived from best available published data, treatment guidelines, a physician survey, and published unit cost data. Outputs were measured in terms of costs per acute mood episode avoided, costs per euthymic day gained, and costs per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Direct health care payer costs are used in the analyses.

RESULTS

The base-case model for patients with a recent manic episode indicated that lamotrigine is the most effective treatment for avoiding both acute depression episodes and all types of acute episodes (depression and mania). It is also the most effective treatment in terms of number of euthymic days achieved (309 days per patient per year). Olanzapine is most effective for avoiding acute mania episodes. Total direct costs of treatment are lowest for the lithium treatment arm (Dollars 8,710 per patient for the 18-month period). All maintenance therapies were cost effective compared with the no-maintenance (acute-only treatment) arm. In the base case, lamotrigine had incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of Dollars 30 per euthymic day and Dollars 2,400 per acute episode avoided compared with lithium. A QALY analysis indicated that lamotrigine is cost effective in patients with a recent manic episode at Dollars 26,000 per QALY. The base-case model indicated that lamotrigine dominates olanzapine, (that is, lamotrigine costs less and is more effective than olanzapine) in patients with a recent manic episode. In a sensitivity analysis using outcomes from the pivotal trial of recently depressed patients, lamotrigine, in comparison with lithium, was not shown to be as cost effective as in the recently manic patients, but it was still cost effective compared with no maintenance treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

For a defined cohort of patients with BD-I, the pharmacoeconomic model indicated that prevention of mood episodes with lithium and lamotrigine is cost effective in patients with a recent manic, mixed, or hypomanic episode. The conclusions with respect to the indirect comparison with olanzapine should be validated if and when direct trial data become available. Cost-effectiveness of maintenance treatments for patients with BD-I (recently depressed as well as recently manic) are likely to improve in models with a broader costing perspective and that take a longer time frame. Further research into the outcome implications of health-related quality of life and other BD subgroups are recommended.

Long-term Effectiveness and Cost of a Systematic Care Program for Bipolar Disorder

CONTEXT

Despite the availability of efficacious treatments, the long-term course of bipolar disorder is often unfavorable.

OBJECTIVE

To test the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention program to improve the quality of care and long-term outcomes for persons with bipolar disorder.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial with allocation concealment and blinded outcome assessment.

SETTING

Mental health clinics of a group-model prepaid health plan.

PATIENTS

Of 785 patients in treatment for bipolar disorder who were invited to participate, 509 attended an evaluation appointment, 450 were found eligible to participate, and 441 enrolled in the trial.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomly assigned to a multicomponent intervention program or to continued care as usual. Three nurse care managers provided a 2-year systematic intervention program, including the following: a structured group psychoeducational program, monthly telephone monitoring of mood symptoms and medication adherence, feedback to treating mental health providers, facilitation of appropriate follow-up care, and as-needed outreach and crisis intervention.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

In-person blinded research interviews every 3 months assessed mood symptoms using the Longitudinal Interval Follow-up Examination. Health plan administrative records were used to assess the use and cost of mental health services.

RESULTS

Intent-to-treat analyses demonstrated that the intervention significantly reduced the mean level of mania symptoms (z = 2.09, P = .04) and the time with significant mania symptoms (19.2 vs 24.7 weeks; F(1) = 6.0, P = .01). There was no significant intervention effect on mean level of depressive symptoms (z = 0.19, P = .85) or time with significant depressive symptoms (47.6 vs 50.7 weeks; F(1) = 0.56, P = .45). Benefits of the intervention were found only in a subgroup of 343 persons with clinically significant mood symptoms at the baseline assessment. The incremental cost (adjusted) of the intervention was 1251 dollars (95% confidence interval, 55-2446 dollars), including approximately 800 dollars for the intervention program services and an approximate 500 dollars increase in the costs of other mental health services.

CONCLUSIONS

Population-based systematic care programs can significantly reduce the frequency and severity of mania in bipolar disorder, and cost increases are modest considering the clinical gains. The incorporation of more specific cognitive and behavioral content or more effective medication regimens may be necessary to significantly reduce the symptoms of depression.

The clinical history and costs associated with delayed diagnosis of bipolar disorder

The purpose of this reported study was to determine healthcare utilization and costs associated with delayed diagnosis of bipolar disorder. With use of automated data from a large integrated health system in the Midwest, all patients with newly diagnosed bipolar disorder recorded in any inpatient or outpatient encounter from January 1, 2000 to August 31, 2002 were identified. The date of initial diagnosis was the index date. For each patient in the bipolar cohort, 5 comparison patients were randomly selected from the general population of health system members and matched with the bipolar patients by sex, race, and age (-/+ 5 years). Data on healthcare utilization (inpatient, outpatient, emergency department, pharmacy) were collected with a focus on mental health, from January 1, 1990, through 1 year after the index date. The cohort is 62% female and 64% White. Median time between initial mental health diagnosis and bipolar diagnosis was 21 months, with 33% of subjects receiving a bipolar diagnosis within 6 months of their initial mental health diagnosis; however, for 31% of the remaining bipolar subjects, the time of their initial mental health presentation to bipolar diagnosis was 4 years or more. The number and duration of treatment with antidepressants increased as time to bipolar diagnosis increased. Patients with bipolar disorder had at least twice the number of interactions with the healthcare system before the index date than the non-bipolar comparison group. Mean monthly costs before and after bipolar diagnosis were not strikingly different for patients with bipolar disorder, but costs after bipolar diagnosis increased with increasing time to bipolar diagnosis. Bipolar disorder is a costly illness for which the impact on the healthcare system may vary depending on how quickly it is diagnosed. Delays in diagnosis appear related to additional costs after diagnosis.

Identifying and improving non-adherence in bipolar disorders

OBJECTIVES

To review the definition of non-adherence, its clinical and economic impact and identify its role and impact in clinical practice.

METHODS

A selective review of the literature as conducted of articles and literature known to the authors.

RESULTS

There is a paucity of studies examining specifically treatment non-adherence and its consequences in bipolar disorder. Few studies have systematically examined ways in which treatment adherence can impact treatment and improve outcome.

CONCLUSION

Non-adherence is common in the management of bipolar disorder. Clinicians and Researchers alike need to remain alert and be aware of issues related to non-adherence--in particular suicide. Like other course-modifiers non-adherence has to be considered, sought and addressed, and this is perhaps best done by including psychoeducation in routine clinical care.

Costs of physical and mental comorbidities among employees: a comparison of those with and without bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

To compare the cost and utilization of health care services for various comorbid conditions among employees with bipolar disorder (BPD) and two other population cohorts: employees without BPD and employees with other mental disorders (OMD).

METHODS

Retrospective database analysis on a 2-year study period, from January 1, 2001, through December 31, 2002 using adjudicated health insurance medical claims on more than 230 000 employees plus their eligible dependents. Study comparisons were performed among employees with BPD (cohort BPD), employees without BPD (cohort NBD), and employees with OMD (cohort OMD). Outcome measures included the cost and utilization of health services for various comorbid conditions as defined by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ); using 261 specific categories (SCs) and the 17 Major Diagnostic Categories (MDCs).

RESULTS

Employees in cohort BPD (n = 761) had greater average annual medical and prescription drug costs than the two other employee cohorts. Costs for cohort BPD were significantly greater (p <or= 0.05) than for cohort NBD (n = 229 145) for six of the 17 MDCs, including the categories of mental disorders (2036 dollars vs. 65 dollars), injury and poisoning (544 dollars vs. 162 dollars), musculoskeletal/connective tissue (607 dollars vs. 315 dollars), other conditions (274 dollars vs. 134 dollars), respiratory system (217 dollars vs. 104 dollars), and nervous system/sensory organs (225 dollars vs. 119 dollars). Similarly, comparisons across AHRQ's 261 SCs found the annual medical costs associated with BPD were greater in 137 (52%) of the 261 categories. Differences between cohort BPD and cohort OMD (n = 26 776) were significant (p <or= 0.05) in three MDCs, with BPD 3.4 times greater than OMD in the mental disorders category: 2036 dollars vs. 596 dollars, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Employees with BPD have greater cost and utilization of services due to various mental and physical comorbidities than either employees without BPD or employees with OMD. The findings are consistent with current literature concerning the comorbidities associated with BPD, and suggest that further longitudinal and observational investigation is necessary to attempt to improve diagnosis and treatment of not only BPD, but also associated targeted diseases commonly found in employees with BPD.

Coût du trouble bipolaire : revue de la littérature

INTRODUCTION

According to the estimates of the World Bank and the World Health Organization bipolar disorder is the sixth leading cause of handicap throughout the world. The burden of this disease is similar to the one of schizophrenia. But cost-of-illness studies are too seldom. Although preventive treatments of bipolar disorder are available for more than fifty years, their economic impact has rarely been studied.

LITERATURE FINDINGS

This review shows that the yearly cost of bipolar disorder is between 10,000 and 16,000 euro (12,000 and 18,000 US dollars). Eighty percent are indirect costs, 15% are linked to hospitalization and 5% to drugs. Hospitalization costs are lower in Health Maintenance Organization or general population studies than in studies performed on populations receiving care from psychiatric institutions or with a low socio-economic status.

DISCUSSION

The use of mood stabilizers has a substantial impact on direct costs which are halved and consequently on indirect costs. But different surveys all agree on the dramatic under-use of mood stabilizers which may be adequately prescribed to only a quarter of bipolar patients.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, the optimization of mental health system resources should prompt incentives to better screen, diagnose, and treat patients with a bipolar disorder.

Cost-effectiveness of clinical interventions for reducing the global burden of bipolar disorder

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder has been ranked seventh among the worldwide causes of non-fatal disease burden.

AIMS

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of interventions for reducing the global burden of bipolar disorder.

METHOD

Hospital- and community-based delivery of two generic mood stabilisers (lithium and valproic acid), alone and in combination with psychosocial treatment, were modelled for 14 global sub-regions. A population model was employed to estimate the impact of different strategies, relative to no intervention. Total costs (in international dollars (I$)) and effectiveness (disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted) were combined to form cost-effectiveness ratios.

RESULTS

Baseline results showed lithium to be no more costly yet more effective than valproic acid, assuming an anti-suicidal effect for lithium but not for valproic acid. Community-based treatment with lithium and psychosocial care was most cost-effective (cost per DALY averted: I$2165-6475 in developing sub-regions; I$5487-21123 in developed sub-regions).

CONCLUSIONS

Community-based interventions for bipolar disorder were estimated to be more efficient than hospital-based services, each DALY averted costing between one and three times average gross national income.

Increasing lifestyle physical activity in patients with depression or other serious mental illness

People with severe and persistent mental illness are more likely to be overweight and to suffer from obesity-related illnesses such as diabetes and heart disease than healthy individuals. Lifestyle change interventions that emphasize integrating physical activity into daily life have not been studied extensively in people with mental illness. The authors present the results of an initial feasibility study of a lifestyle modification program for individuals with serious mental illness. Thirty-nine individuals with depression or other serious mental illness were recruited from three different mental health facilities to attend an 18-week lifestyle intervention program promoting physical activity and healthy eating. At each session, participants discussed topics related to healthy lifestyle changes and participated in group walks. Data were collected at baseline, 6 weeks, and 18 weeks. The results demonstrated that individuals who have depression and other serious mental illnesses can participate in a lifestyle intervention program. Participants who attended the final follow-up session had lost weight over the course of the intervention. Study retention was a problem. However, the cost of this type of group-based lifestyle intervention was relatively low, so that such an intervention for this high-risk group may still be cost-effective.

Lost Time, Absence Costs, and Reduced Productivity Output for Employees With Bipolar Disorder

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the incremental health-related lost work time and at-work productivity loss for employees with bipolar disorder (BPD).

METHODS

Health-related absence and real productivity output of employees with BPD were compared with that of non-BPD and other employee cohorts from a large employer database using multivariate regression to control for cohort differences.

RESULTS

After adjusting for confounding factors, employees with BPD had significantly higher absence costs (1,219 dollars) and 11.5 additional lost days (P<0.05) per year than those without BPD. Adjusted annual productivity output was 20% lower for the BPD group (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Employees with BPD are less likely to be present for work. When present, their productivity level is similar to that of other employees, but over the course of a year, their absence rates result in significant productivity losses.

Prevalence, correlates, and comorbidity of bipolar I disorder and axis I and II disorders: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions

OBJECTIVE

To present nationally representative data on 12-month and lifetime prevalence, correlates, and comorbidity of bipolar I disorder.

METHOD

The data were derived from the 2001-2002 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (N = 43,093). Prevalences and associations of bipolar I disorder with sociodemographic correlates and Axis I and II disorders were determined.

RESULTS

Prevalences of 12-month and lifetime DSM-IV bipolar I disorder were 2.0% (95% CI = 1.82 to 2.18) and 3.3% (95% CI = 2.76 to 3.84), respectively, and no sex differences were observed. The odds of bipolar I disorder were significantly greater among Native Americans, younger adults, and respondents who were widowed/separated/divorced and of lower socioeconomic status and significantly lower among Asians and Hispanics (p < .05). Men were significantly (p < .05) more likely to have unipolar mania and earlier onset and longer duration of manic episodes, while women were more likely to have mixed and major depressive episodes and to be treated for manic, mixed, and major depressive episodes. Bipolar I disorder was found to be highly and significantly related (p < .05) to substance use, anxiety, and personality disorders, but not to alcohol abuse.

CONCLUSION

Bipolar I disorder is more prevalent in the U.S. population than previously estimated, highlighting the underestimation of the economic costs associated with this illness. Associations between bipolar I disorder and Axis I and II disorders were all significant, underscoring the need for systematic assessment of comorbidity among bipolar I patients.

Size and burden of depressive disorders in Europe

We review epidemiological studies of depression in Europe. Community surveys are essential. Methodological differences in survey methods, instruments, nuances in language and translation limit comparability, but consistent findings are emerging. Western European countries show 1 year prevalence of major depression of around 5%, with two-fold variation, probably methodological, and higher prevalences in women, the middle-aged, less privileged groups, and those experiencing social adversity. There is high comorbidity with other psychiatric and physical disorders. Depression is a major cause of disability. Incidence has been less studied and lifetime incidence is not clear, with longitudinal studies required. There is pressing need for prevalence studies from Eastern Europe. The considerable differences in health care systems among European countries may impact on proportions of depressives receiving treatment and its adequacy, particularly in the key area of primary care, and require further study. There is a need for public health programmes aimed at improving treatment, reducing rates and consequences of depressive disorders.

Patient-based utilities for bipolar disorder-related health states

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder is a psychiatric disorder which impacts patient functioning and well-being. With increasing interest in cost-effectiveness of treatments, it is necessary to provide estimates of patient's perspectives on treatment outcomes. This study estimated health state utilities for hypothetical bipolar-related health states and patient's current health from bipolar I patients.

METHODS

Clinicians completed Young Mania Rating Scale, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, and Global Assessment Score. Patients completed structured standard gamble (SG) utility assessment interviews, and the other patient-based measures. Interviews obtained utilities for hypothetical bipolar-related health states describing symptom severity, functioning and well-being, and treatment-related side effects.

RESULTS

Ninety-six patients were recruited from psychiatry outpatient practices. Mean utilities for inpatient states ranged from 0.12 to 0.33; outpatient mania states ranged from 0.29 to 0.64; outpatient stable states ranged from 0.53 to 0.85. Mean utility for current health was 0.80 (S.D.=0.22). Patients preferred monotherapy compared with combination therapy health states. Ordinary least squares regression indicated weight gain was associated with a 0.066 decrease in health state utilities (P=0.013).

LIMITATIONS

Study sample consisted of selected stable and educated patients and small sample sizes may limit generalizability for some utilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Bipolar disorder patients are capable of participating in utility assessment and providing ratings for hypothetical health states associated with different mood stabilizer treatments.

Prevalence and burden of bipolar disorders in European countries

A literature search, supplemented by an expert survey and selected reanalyses of existing data from epidemiological studies was performed to determine the prevalence and associated burden of bipolar I and II disorder in EU countries. Only studies using established diagnostic instruments based on DSM-III-R or DSM-IV, or ICD-10 criteria were considered. Fourteen studies from a total of 10 countries were identified. The majority of studies reported 12-month estimates of approximately 1% (range 0.5-1.1%), with little evidence of a gender difference. The cumulative lifetime incidence (two prospective-longitudinal studies) is slightly higher (1.5-2%); and when the wider range of bipolar spectrum disorders is considered estimates increased to approximately 6%. Few studies have reported separate estimates for bipolar I and II disorders. Age of first onset of bipolar disorder is most frequently reported in late adolescence and early adulthood. A high degree of concurrent and sequential comorbidity with other mental disorders and physical illnesses is common. Most studies suggest equally high or even higher levels of impairments and disabilities of bipolar disorders as compared to major depression and schizophrenia. Few data are available on treatment and health care utilization.

Cost-effectiveness of relapse-prevention cognitive therapy for bipolar disorder: 30-month study

BACKGROUND

We have reported the advantageous clinical outcome of adding cognitive therapy to medication in the prevention of relapse of bipolar disorder.

AIMS

This 30-month study compares the cost-effectiveness of cognitive therapy with standard care.

METHOD

We randomly allocated 103 individuals with bipolar 1 disorder to standard treatment and cognitive therapy plus standard treatment. Service use and costs were measured at 3-month intervals and cost-effectiveness was assessed using the net-benefit approach.

RESULTS

The group receiving cognitive therapy had significantly better clinical outcomes. The extra costs were offset by reduced service use elsewhere. The probability of cognitive therapy being cost-effective was high and robust to different therapy prices.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination of cognitive therapy and mood stabilizers was superior to mood stabilizers alone in terms of clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness for those with frequent relapses of bipolar disorder.

Bipolar disorder--costs and comorbidity

Not only is bipolar disorder a chronic, severe psychiatric disorder, it is also expensive to treat and expensive to society. An estimate of the total cost of bipolar disorder made more than a decade ago was as high as 45 billion dollars per year. Most of this cost is accounted for by indirect costs related to reduced functional capacity and lost work. Patients with bipolar disorder have higher rates of utilization of healthcare resources compared with the general population and compared with patients with other types of psychiatric conditions. Comorbidity contributes to the heavy burden that bipolar disorder imposes on society. Bipolar disorder frequently occurs together with other psychiatric disorders, especially anxiety disorders and substance abuse. In addition, bipolar disorder has been associated with a variety of general medical conditions, which further complicate management of the psychiatric disorder.

Effectiveness and medical costs of divalproex versus lithium in the treatment of bipolar disorder: results of a naturalistic clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The clinical, quality of life (QOL), and medical cost outcomes of treatment with divalproex were compared with lithium in patients with bipolar I disorder over 1 year.

METHODS

In a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial, 201 adults hospitalized with bipolar I manic or mixed episodes were randomized to divalproex or lithium, in addition to usual psychiatric care, and followed for 1 year. All subsequent treatment of bipolar disorder was managed by the patient's psychiatrist. Symptoms of mania and depression were evaluated at baseline and at hospital discharge. Assessments at the start of maintenance therapy and after 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months included manic and depressive symptoms, disability days and QOL. Medical resource use data were also collected monthly and costs were estimated using national sources.

RESULTS

Divalproex-treated patients (12%) were less likely to discontinue study medications for lack of efficacy or adverse effects than lithium-treated patients (23%). No statistically significant differences between the treatment groups were observed over the 1-year maintenance phase for clinical symptoms, QOL outcomes, or disability days. Mean estimated total medical costs were USD 28,911 for the divalproex group compared with USD 30,666 for the lithium treatment group. Patients continuing mood stabilizer therapy at 3 months had slightly better health outcomes and substantially lower total medical costs than those who discontinued therapy ( USD 10,091 versus USD 34,432, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Divalproex maintenance treatment for bipolar disorder resulted in comparable medical costs, clinical and QOL outcomes compared with lithium. Patients remaining on mood stabilizer therapy had substantially lower total medical costs and better health outcomes compared with those who discontinued therapy.

Bipolar disorder: disease burden

Bipolar disorder is a chronic, severe, recurrent mood disorder. Traditional estimates of the prevalence of the disorder may underestimate the actual total disease burden. The condition can occur across a wide spectrum of ages, but the most common age of onset appears to be between the ages of 15 and 19. Bipolar disorder is often underdiagnosed or misdiagnosed, with profound negative clinical and economic consequences. Medical and psychiatric comorbidity is common in patients with bipolar disorder. Functional disability because of bipolar disorder is comparable with that of many chronic medical conditions. It has been estimated that the total annual societal cost of bipolar disorder may be as high as 45 billion dollars.

Comparison of mental health resources used by patients with bipolar disorder treated with risperidone, olanzapine, or quetiapine

OBJECTIVE

The atypical antipsychotics, risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine, have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for treatment of mania associated with bipolar disorder. Information on the relative mental health resource use of these therapies is helpful to pharmacy managers since differences in efficacy and safety may translate into differences in mental health care utilization. We compared charges for other mental health services associated with risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine treatment of patients with bipolar disorder to assess whether there were significant differences between these therapies. A secondary analysis involved dose-equivalent adjustment of the average allowed charge of the 3 atypical antipsychotics.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study based on administrative data for 46 U.S. commercial health plans represented in a commercial database covering the period January 1998 through April 2002. The 6,625 patients included in the study had at least 2 contiguous pharmacy claims for a study antipsychotic, had received no other antipsychotics concurrently, and had not switched from an alternative antipsychotic in the preceding 90 days. Provider-submitted (billed) charges were selected in preference to paid amounts as being more accurate indicators of relative differences in the use of mental health resources. Mental health care charges were measured per patient per month (PPPM) and included charges for the study antipsychotics and charges for the other mental health care services (inpatient, physician and other ambulatory, and other psychotropic medications). Differences in other mental health care charges PPPM among the 3 therapies were assessed with multivariate regression, adjusting for differing patient characteristics. Differences in antipsychotic drug charges PPPM were assessed after adjustment to reflect an equivalent average daily dose.

RESULTS

Regression estimates adjusted for patient differences did not show statistically significant differences in other mental health care charges PPPM among the 3 antipsychotic drug therapies. Other mental health charges associated with quetiapine were estimated to be 14 US dollars, or 3% lower than those associated with risperidone, but this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.069). The PPPM charges for quetiapine versus olanzapine and olanzapine versus risperidone were also not different (P = 0.231 and P = 0.39, respectively). After adjusting for differences in average daily dose, risperidone and quetiapine had antipsychotic drug charges that were 84 US dollars and 76 US dollars PPPM lower than those of olanzapine (P < 0.01); the difference between the adjusted drug charges PPPM for risperidone and quetiapine was not significant.

CONCLUSION

Total charges for mental health services other than the study drug were not different for risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine in patients treated for bipolar disorder. However, based on prescription charges, olanzapine appears to be considerably more costly at an equivalent daily dose than either risperidone or quetiapine.

Variation in outpatient mental health service utilization under capitation

BACKGROUND

To improve the financing of Colorado's public mental health system, the state designed, implemented, and evaluated a pilot program that consisted of three reimbursement models for the provision of outpatient services. Community mental health centers (CMHCs), the primary providers of comprehensive mental health services to Medicaid recipients in Colorado, had to search for innovative ways to provide cost-effective services.

STUDY AIMS

This study assessed outpatient service delivery to Medicaid-eligible consumers under this program. This paper is among the first to study variations in the delivery of specific types of outpatient mental health services under capitated financing systems.

METHODS

This study uses claims data (1994-1997) from Colorado's Medicaid and Mental Health Services Agency. The fee-for-service (FFS) model served as the comparison model. Two capitated models under evaluation are: (i) direct capitation (DC), where the state contracts with a non-profit entity to provide both the services and administers the capitated financing, and (ii) managed behavioral health organization (MBHO), which is a joint venture between a for-profit company who manages the capitated financing and a number of non-profit entities who deliver the services. A sample of severely mentally ill patients who reported at least one inpatient visit was included in the analysis. Types of outpatient services of interest are: day-treatment visits, group therapy, individual therapy, medication monitoring, case management, testing, and all other services. Comparisons were set up to examine differences in service utilization and cost between FFS and each of the two capitated models, using a two-part model across three time periods.

RESULTS

Results showed differences in service delivery among reimbursement models over time. Capitated providers had higher initial utilization in most outpatient service categories than their FFS counterparts and as a result of capitation, outpatient services delivered under these providers decreased to converge to the FFS pattern. Findings also suggest substitution between group therapy and individual psychotherapy. Overall, more service integration was observed and less complex service packages were provided post capitation. IMPLICATION FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND POLICIES: Financing models and organizational arrangements have an impact on mental health service delivery. Changes in utilization and costs of specific types of outpatient services reflect the effects of capitation. Understanding the mechanism for these changes may lead to more streamlined service delivery allowing extra funding for expanding the range of cost-effective treatment alternatives. These changes pose implications for improving the financing of public mental health systems, coordination of mental health services with other healthcare and human services, and provision of services through a more efficient financing system.

Bipolar disorder pills in perspective: questions from peer review

I recently performed a peer review of a manuscript submitted for consideration for publication in the Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy (JMCP) on the subject of the total costs of care for patients with bipolar disorder treated with divalproex versus one of 3 atypical antipsychotics; 2 different classes of medications were involved. In this regard, a point arose that divalproex treats mania but not depression in the condition singularly labeled as bipolar disorder. So, pitting the 2 classes against one another may not be appropriate unless one can argue that both classes treat the same problem. To a neurologist, the question is: What is the actual defect?

Bipolar disorder and health-related quality of life : review of burden of disease and clinical trials

Bipolar disorder is a chronic psychiatric disorder with a variable course and significant impact on patients' social, occupational, and general functioning and wellbeing. Although there are effective pharmaceutical and psychosocial interventions for patients with bipolar disorder, many patients receive poor-quality care. Prospective longitudinal studies demonstrate that less than half of bipolar disorder patients have a good long-term response to treatment, long-term outcome is highly variable, and many patients do not fully recover. There is substantial evidence that bipolar disorder is associated with significant impairment to functioning and wellbeing.However, few clinical trials comparing treatments for bipolar disorder have incorporated health-related quality-of-life (HR-QOL) assessments. Existing studies suggest that, while treatment improves HR-QOL, there is limited evidence for differences between the mood stabilisers in terms of HR-QOL outcomes. Additional clinical trials are needed to evaluate patient-reported outcomes associated with the most frequently used pharmacological treatments to determine whether there are meaningful differences between treatments. There are challenges in measuring HR-QOL in patients with acute mania, and future studies should assess the psychometric qualities of HR-QOL instruments in these and other bipolar disorder patients. HR-QOL outcome data may be useful in informing psychiatrists, patients and patient family members of the effects of treatment for bipolar disorder on patients' everyday lives, functioning and wellbeing.

Use of medical and behavioral health services by adolescents with bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

This study compared use of medical and behavioral health care by adolescents with bipolar disorder and other adolescents and identified areas in need of more clinical attention.

METHODS

Medical and behavioral health insurance claims from 1996 for 100,880 adolescents were examined and categorized. Differences between and among various categories of disease were explored by using multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Among the 10,970 adolescents who used at least one behavioral health service, adolescents with bipolar disorder (N=326) had significantly higher behavioral health costs than those with mood or non-mood disorders, a result driven by these adolescents' significantly higher hospital admission rates for behavioral health care. Adolescents with bipolar disorder also had significantly higher medical admission rates compared with adolescents who had other behavioral health diagnoses. More than half of the 14 medical admissions for adolescents with bipolar disorder were due to drug overdose.

CONCLUSIONS

Reallocation of medical and behavioral health resources to improve ambulatory treatment of bipolar disorder among adolescents has the potential to decrease the use and costs of health care while improving the welfare of these adolescents and their families.

The impact of unrecognized bipolar disorders for patients treated for depression with antidepressants in the fee-for-services California Medicaid (Medi-Cal) program

BACKGROUND

This study compares hospital use, suicide risk and health care costs of antidepressant patients with recognized bipolar disorders (recognized-BP) and unrecognized bipolar disorders (unrecognized-BP) with non-bipolar (non-BP) patients.

METHODS

Data from the California Medicaid (Medi-Cal) program were used to identify 25,460 adults with a new episode of antidepressant therapy. Recognized-BP patients received either a bipolar (BP) diagnosis or a mood stabilizer (MS) on or before the initiation of antidepressant therapy. Unrecognized-BP patients received a BP diagnosis or MS therapy after antidepressant initiation. Non-BP patients had no BP diagnosis and no MS use. Multivariate models were used to estimate marginal risks and costs across groups.

RESULTS

Recognized-BP and unrecognized-BP represented 14.9% and 6.2% of all antidepressant users, respectively. Less than half of recognized-BP patients used a MS medication in conjunction with their antidepressant. Unrecognized-BP patients were nearly four times more likely to attempt suicide and 50% more likely to be hospitalized than non-BP patients. Recognized-BP patients were at lower risk for attempted suicide and hospitalization relative to unrecognized-BP patients. Unrecognized-BP patients experienced higher 1-year total costs relative to non-BP patients (USD 995, p<0.01) and recognized-BP patients (USD 682, p<0.05).

LIMITATIONS

Clinically relevant medical records data were not available making the classification of patients as unrecognized-BP, recognized-BP and non-BP imprecise.

CONCLUSIONS

Unrecognized-BP is both common and costly. More than half of all recognized-BP patients do not use an MS at the time they initiated antidepressant therapy. More effort is needed to provide early and correct diagnosis and effectively treat both recognized-BP and unrecognized-BP patients.

Forensic assertive community treatment: preventing incarceration of adults with severe mental illness

OBJECTIVE

Persons with severe mental illness are overrepresented in jails and prisons in the United States. A national survey was conducted to identify assertive community treatment programs that have been modified to prevent arrest and incarceration of adults with severe mental illness who have been involved with the criminal justice system.

METHODS

Members of the National Association of County Behavioral Health Directors (NACBHD) were surveyed to identify assertive community treatment programs serving persons with criminal justice histories and working closely with criminal justice agencies. Programs were identified that met three study criteria: all enrollees had a history of involvement with the criminal justice system, a criminal justice agency was the primary referral source, and a close partnership existed with a criminal justice agency to perform jail diversion. Senior representatives of each program were subsequently contacted, and a telephone survey was administered to gather information about the design and operation of the programs.

RESULTS

A total of 291 of 314 NACBHD members (93 percent) responded to the survey. Sixteen programs that met the study criteria were identified in nine states. The primary referral sources for 13 of these programs (81 percent) were local jails. Eleven programs (69 percent) incorporated probation officers as members of their assertive community treatment teams. Eight programs (50 percent) had a supervised residential component, with five providing residentially based addiction treatment. Eleven of the 16 programs have begun operating since 1999. Only three programs have published outcome data on program effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Forensic assertive community treatment is an emerging model for preventing arrest and incarceration of adults with severe mental illness who have substantial histories of involvement with the criminal justice system. Further research is needed to establish the structure, function, and effectiveness of this developing model of service delivery.

The societal costs and quality of life of patients suffering from bipolar disorder in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE

To assess the societal costs and quality of life of patients suffering from bipolar disorder in the Netherlands.

METHOD

Forty persons with a lifetime diagnosis of bipolar disorder (SCID/DSM-IV) and representative for the Dutch general population were interviewed to collect data on direct (use of medical resources) and indirect (productivity losses because of absence from work and reduced efficiency at work) costs of illness. Respondents' quality of life was also assessed. Prevalence (5.2%) of bipolar disorder was used to estimate total costs.

RESULTS

Total costs of bipolar disorder were estimated at US 1.83 billion dollars (total direct costs = US 454 million dollars; total indirect costs = US 1.37 billion dollars). Participants' quality-of-life scores were lower than those of the general population.

CONCLUSION

The societal costs form patients suffering of bipolar disorder in the Netherlands were high, especially the indirect costs because of absence from work. The quality of life of bipolar patients was lower than the general population.

A rapid and systematic review and economic evaluation of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of newer drugs for treatment of mania associated with bipolar affective disorder

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of quetiapine, olanzapine and valproate semisodium in the treatment of mania associated with bipolar disorder.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases; industry submissions made to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence.

REVIEW METHODS

Randomised trials and economic evaluations that evaluated the effectiveness of quetiapine, olanzapine or valproate semisodium in the treatment of mania associated with bipolar disorder were selected for inclusion. Data were extracted by one reviewer into a Microsoft Access database and checked for quality and accuracy by a second. The quality of the cost-effectiveness studies was assessed using a checklist updated from that developed by Drummond and colleagues. Relative risk and mean difference data were presented as Forest plots but only pooled where this made sense clinically and statistically. Studies were grouped by drug and, within each drug, by comparator used. Chi-squared tests of heterogeneity were performed for the outcomes if pooling was indicated. A probabilistic model was developed to estimate costs from the perspective of the NHS, and health outcomes in terms of response rate, based on an improvement of at least 50% in a patient's baseline manic symptoms derived from an interview-based mania assessment scale. The model evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the alternative drugs when used as part of treatment for the acute manic episode only.

RESULTS

Eighteen randomised trials met the inclusion criteria. Aspects of three of the quetiapine studies were commercial-in-confidence. The quality of the included trials was limited and overall, key methodological criteria were not met in most trials. Quetiapine, olanzapine and valproate semisodium appear superior to placebo in reducing manic symptoms, but may cause side-effects. There appears to be little difference between these treatments and lithium in terms of effectiveness, but quetiapine is associated with somnolence and weight gain, whereas lithium is associated with tremor. Olanzapine as adjunct therapy to mood stabilisers may be more effective than placebo in reducing mania and improving global health, but it is associated with more dry mouth, somnolence, weight gain, increased appetite, tremor and speech disorder. There was little difference between these treatments and haloperidol in reducing mania, but haloperidol was associated with more extrapyramidal side-effects and negative implications for health-related quality of life. Intramuscular olanzapine and lorazepam were equally effective and safe in one very short (24 hour) trial. Valproate semisodium and carbamazepine were equally effective and safe in one small trial in children. Olanzapine may be more effective than valproate semisodium in reducing mania, but was associated with more dry mouth, increased appetite, oedema, somnolence, speech disorder, Parkinson-like symptoms and weight gain. Valproate semisodium was associated with more nausea than olanzapine. The results from the base-case analysis demonstrate that choice of optimal strategy is dependent on the maximum that the health service is prepared to pay per additional responder. For a figure of less than 7179 British pounds per additional responder, haloperidol is the optimal decision; for a spend in excess of this, it would be olanzapine. Under the most favourable scenario in relation to the costs of responders and non-responders beyond the 3-week period considered in the base-case analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of olanzapine is reduced to 1236 British pounds.

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison with placebo, quetiapine, olanzapine and valproate semisodium appear superior in reducing manic symptoms, but all drugs are associated with adverse events. In comparison with lithium, no significant differences were found between the three drugs in terms of effectiveness, and all were associated with adverse events. Several limitations of the cost-effectiveness analysis exist, which inevitably means that the results should be treated with some caution. There remains a need for well-conducted, randomised, double-blind head-to-head comparisons of drugs used in the treatment of mania associated with bipolar disorder and their cost-effectiveness. Participant demographic, diagnostic characteristics, the treatment of mania in children, the use of adjunctive therapy and long-term safety issues in the elderly population, and acute and long-term treatment are also subjects for further study.

[Economic analyses of olanzapine in the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder]

Schizophrenia generates important costs for society both direct, as a consequence of hospitalization and outpatient treatment, and indirect; related to loss of productivity. The atypical antipsychotics, such as olanzapine, have supposed an important advance in the treatment of schizophrenia. The greater cost of atypical antipsychotics with respect to conventional drugs has led to the conduction of pharmacoeconomic studies to determine its efficiency. This article reviews the complete pharmacoeconomic studies that compare olanzapine with haloperidol and risperidone in the treatment of schizophrenia. Cost analyses comparing olanzapine and haloperidol show that the former drug does not add increased cost to therapy, and even contributes to lessen expenses fundamentally as a result of a decrease in hospitalizations. In the economic evaluations comparing olanzapine and risperidone, the results are not conclusive, and in general, the total costs associated with both treatments were similar. In the treatment of bipolar disorder, although few studies have estimated the economic impact of olanzapine, it has been observed a reduction of hospitalization costs associated to the treatment with olanzapine.

[Annual costs of bipolar disorders in Germany]

With costs of approximately 5.8 billion EUR annually, bipolar disorders represent a substantial burden on German society. The costs are mainly due to high indirect costs caused by morbidity-related unemployment, suicide-related losses of productivity, time off from work, and early retirement. Inpatient care, with a considerable average length of stay for patients with bipolar disorders, accounts for two-thirds of direct costs. This paper refers to statistics on use of healthcare services based primarily on the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision. Representing a relatively narrow definition of bipolar disorders in comparison with the clinically relevant spectrum, this classification leads to a conservative estimate of the total costs. The significant lag between first acute episode and a correct diagnosis causes a delayed onset of maintenance treatment that leads to increased costs. Increasing public awareness, destigmatizing the disease, and educating physicians are necessary steps to limit the substantial economic burden for society.

[Cost of care for depressive disorders in primary and specialized care in Germany]

Service utilization and total direct cost of care was assessed in 270 patients suffering from depressive disorder. Patients were recruited from primary care physicians or family doctors (n = 43) or psychiatrists (n = 23) in office practice, from three different regions in Germany (county of Düren and city of Aachen, Lörrach-county, city of Munich). A detailed catalogue of unit costs (including inpatient, outpatient and rehabilitative services) was used for calculating total cost of care on an individual basis. Service utilization and costs referred to 2001. Mean cost of total medical care of the study patients was euro 3849 (excluding cost of drugs for physical illness). The cost for treating depressive disorders and additional psychiatric co-morbidity (which is included into the total cost of care) was euro 2073 per patient and year. When cross-checking with ICD-10 criteria for depressive disorders, the original diagnosis by family doctors or psychiatrists could be confirmed in 186 patients of the total sample (n = 270), suggesting that there is a high amount of falsely diagnosed patients in primary and specialized care of depressive patients in Germany. Direct cost of the 186 confirmed patients was higher (total care cost: euro 4715, cost for treatment of depression and psychiatric co-morbidity: euro 2541) than in the total group and should be considered as reference cost, when discussing cost of care in depressive patients in Germany. Results suggest to analyse cost of care in depressive patients further and to discuss a more efficient allocation of health budgets in the field.