Evaluation of the Cost-effectiveness of Services for Schizophrenia in the UK Across the Entire Care Pathway in a Single Whole-Disease Model

Real-World Effectiveness, Economic, and Humanistic Outcomes of Selected Oral Antipsychotics in Patients with Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review Evaluating Global Evidence

Background

Schizophrenia is a complex, chronic mental health disorder that confers a substantial disease burden globally. Oral antipsychotic treatments (OATs) are the mainstay for treating early and advanced stages of schizophrenia. Our systematic review aimed to synthesize literature describing real-world effectiveness, economic, and humanistic outcomes of OATs (asenapine, brexpiprazole, cariprazine, iloperidone, lumateperone, lurasidone, olanzapine/samidorphan, paliperidone, and quetiapine) for successful management of the disease.

Methods

PubMed, American Psychological Association PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies reporting real-world effectiveness, costs, humanistic, behavioral (eg, interpersonal relations, suicide ideation), medication adherence, and product-switching outcomes for selected OATs published in English from January 2010 to March 2022 were identified and evaluated qualitatively.

Results

We included 48 studies with different designs providing extensive evidence on schizophrenia. All studies were conducted in countries outside of the United States. In most studies, antipsychotic medications were more effective than placebo, suggesting their value in the management of schizophrenia. Sixteen studies measured the economic outcomes of OATs. Eight studies assessed humanistic outcomes, while one reported behavioral outcomes in three second-generation antipsychotics. Medication adherence was described in two studies, while five studies evaluated product switching. Non-adherence was commonly reported for OATs. Medication non-adherence and treatment discontinuation were predominant factors contributing to the economic burden of schizophrenia.

Conclusion

Our research showcased a significant knowledge gap across OATs spanning the humanistic and behavioral outcomes and medication adherence and switching, suggesting a need for robust evidence generation to help clinicians and payers make informed decisions regarding treatment opportunities and cost-effective strategies for patients with schizophrenia.

The PSY-SIM Model: Using Real-World Data to Inform Health Care Policy for Individuals With Chronic Psychotic Disorders

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS

Few microsimulation models have been developed for chronic psychotic disorders, severe and disabling mental disorders associated with poor medical and psychiatric outcomes, and high costs of care. The objective of this work was to develop a microsimulation model for individuals with chronic psychotic disorders and to use the model to examine the impact of a smoking cessation initiative on patient outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Using health records and survey data from Ontario, Canada, the PSY-SIM model was developed to simulate health and cost outcomes of individuals with chronic psychotic disorders. The model was then used to examine the impact of the Smoking Treatment for Ontario Patients (STOP) program from Ontario on the development of chronic conditions, life expectancy, quality of life, and lifetime health care costs.

STUDY RESULTS

Individuals with chronic psychotic disorders had a lifetime risk of 63% for congestive heart failure and roughly 50% for respiratory disease, cancer and diabetes, and a life expectancy of 76 years. The model suggests the STOP program can reduce morbidity and lead to survival and quality of life gains with modest increases in health care costs. At a long-term quit rate of 4.4%, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the STOP program was $41,936/QALY compared with status quo.

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking cessation initiatives among individuals with chronic psychotic disorders can be cost-effective. These findings will be relevant for decision-makers and clinicians looking to improving health outcomes among this patient population.

A systematic review of whole disease models for informing healthcare resource allocation decisions

BACKGROUND

Whole disease models (WDM) are large-scale, system-level models which can evaluate multiple decision questions across an entire care pathway. Whilst this type of model can offer several advantages as a platform for undertaking economic analyses, the availability and quality of existing WDMs is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to identify existing WDMs to explore which disease areas they cover, to critically assess the quality of these models and provide recommendations for future research.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed on multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database and the Health Technology Assessment database) on 23rd July 2023. Two independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion. Study quality was assessed using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) appraisal checklist for economic evaluations. Model characteristics were descriptively summarised.

RESULTS

Forty-four WDMs were identified, of which thirty-two were developed after 2010. The main disease areas covered by existing WDMs are heart disease, cancer, acquired immune deficiency syndrome and metabolic disease. The quality of included WDMs is generally low. Common limitations included failure to consider the harms and costs of adverse events (AEs) of interventions, lack of probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and poor reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been an increase in the number of WDMs since 2010. However, their quality is generally low which means they may require significant modification before they could be re-used, such as modelling AEs of interventions and incorporation of PSA. Sufficient details of the WDMs need to be reported to allow future reuse/adaptation.

Ethnic disparities in clozapine prescription for service-users with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders: a systematic review

Clozapine is the only licenced medication for treating treatment-resistant schizophrenia. Previous studies have suggested unequal rates of clozapine treatment by ethnicity among individuals with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. One previous review has investigated this topic but was restricted to studies from the USA. This current review aims to synthesise the international literature regarding ethnic disparities in clozapine prescription amongst individuals with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. We searched CINAHL, PubMed, Medline, Embase, APA PsycINFO and Open Grey and reviewed studies reporting on the proportion of service-users prescribed clozapine separately for different ethnic groups, in individuals with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia or any schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. A narrative synthesis was conducted to integrate information from included studies. The review was registered in PROSPERO (Number: CRD42020221731). From 24 studies, there is strong, consistent evidence that Black and Hispanic service-users in the UK and the USA are significantly less likely to receive clozapine than White/Caucasian service-users after controlling for multiple demographic and clinical potential confounders. In New Zealand, Māori service-users were reported to be more likely to receive clozapine than those of White/European ethnicity. There is mixed evidence regarding Asian service-users in the UK. The mentioned disparities were observed in studies with TRS and non-TRS cohorts. The results imply that access to clozapine treatment varies among ethnic groups. These findings raise an ethical concern as they suggest a compromise of the standards of care in schizophrenia treatment practices. Interventions are needed to reduce clozapine prescribing disparities among ethnic communities.

Using a statistical learning approach to identify sociodemographic and clinical predictors of response to clozapine

BACKGROUND

A proportion of people with treatment-resistant schizophrenia fail to show improvement on clozapine treatment. Knowledge of the sociodemographic and clinical factors predicting clozapine response may be useful in developing personalised approaches to treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used data from the electronic health records of the South London and Maudsley (SLaM) hospital between 2007 and 2011. Using the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression statistical learning approach, we examined 35 sociodemographic and clinical factors' predictive ability of response to clozapine at 3 months of treatment. Response was assessed by the level of change in the severity of the symptoms using the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale.

RESULTS

We identified 242 service-users with a treatment-resistant psychotic disorder who had their first trial of clozapine and continued the treatment for at least 3 months. The LASSO regression identified three predictors of response to clozapine: higher severity of illness at baseline, female gender and having a comorbid mood disorder. These factors are estimated to explain 18% of the variance in clozapine response. The model's optimism-corrected calibration slope was 1.37, suggesting that the model will underfit when applied to new data.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that women, people with a comorbid mood disorder and those who are most ill at baseline respond better to clozapine. However, the accuracy of the internally validated and recalibrated model was low. Therefore, future research should indicate whether a prediction model developed by including routinely collected data, in combination with biological information, presents adequate predictive ability to be applied in clinical settings.

A review of economic evaluations of health care for people at risk of psychosis and for first-episode psychosis

BACKGROUND

Preventing psychotic disorders and effective treatment in first-episode psychosis are key priorities for the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. This review assessed the evidence base for the cost-effectiveness of health and social care interventions for people at risk of psychosis and for first-episode psychosis.

METHODS

Electronic searches were conducted using the PsycINFO, MEDLINE and Embase databases to identify relevant published full economic evaluations published before August 2020. Full-text English-language studies reporting a full economic evaluation of a health or social care intervention aiming to reduce or prevent symptoms in people at risk of psychosis or experiencing first-episode psychosis were included. Screening, data extraction, and critical appraisal were performed using pre-specified criteria and forms based on the NHS Economic Evaluation Database (EED) handbook and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist for economic evaluations. The protocol was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42018108226). Results were summarised qualitatively.

RESULTS

Searching identified 1,628 citations (1,326 following the removal of duplications). After two stages of screening 14 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Interventions were varied and included multidisciplinary care, antipsychotic medication, psychological therapy, and assertive outreach. Evidence was limited in the at-risk group with only four identified studies, though all interventions were found to be cost-effective with a high probability (> 80%). A more substantial evidence base was identified for first-episode psychosis (11 studies), with a focus on early intervention (7/11 studies) which again had positive conclusions though with greater uncertainty.

CONCLUSIONS

Study findings generally concluded interventions were cost-effective. The evidence for the population who are at-risk of psychosis was limited, and though there were more studies for the population with first-episode psychosis, limitations of the evidence base (including generalisability and heterogeneity across the methods used) affect the certainty of conclusions.

Acknowledging Patient Heterogeneity in Economic Evaluations in Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Schizophrenia is a severe mental illness with heterogeneous etiology, range of symptoms, and course of illness. Cost-effectiveness analysis often applies averages from populations, which disregards patient heterogeneity even though there are a range of methods available to acknowledge patient heterogeneity. This review evaluates existing economic evaluations of interventions in schizophrenia to understand how patient heterogeneity is currently reflected in economic evaluation.

METHODS

Electronic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO via Ovid and the Health Technology Assessment database were run to identify full economic evaluations of interventions aiming to reduce the symptoms associated with schizophrenia. Two levels of screening were used, and explicit inclusion criteria were applied. Prespecified data extraction and critical appraisal were performed.

RESULTS

Seventy-six relevant studies were identified. More than half (41 of 76) of the articles acknowledged patient heterogeneity in some way through discussion or methods. There was a range of patient characteristics considered, including demographics and socioeconomic factors (eg, age, educational level, ethnicity), clinical characteristics (eg, symptom severity, comorbidities), and preferences (eg, preferences related to outcomes or symptoms). Subgroup analyses were rarely reported (8 of 76).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient heterogeneity was frequently mentioned in studies but was rarely thoroughly investigated in the identified economic evaluations. When investigated, included patient characteristics and methods were found to be heterogeneous. Understanding and acknowledging patient heterogeneity may alter the conclusions of cost-effectiveness evaluations; subsequently, we would encourage further research in this area.

A Systematic Review of Methods and Study Quality of Economic Evaluations for the Treatment of Schizophrenia

Background: Schizophrenia is a severe and complex disease with substantial economic and social burdens. Despite multiple treatment choices, adverse events, and impaired social functions are still challenges in clinical therapy. Pharmacoeconomic evaluations could provide evidence to help decision makers improve the utilization of scarce resources. However, there remains some challenges especially in modeling due to uncertainties in progression of schizophrenia. There are limited summaries about the overall methodologies of schizophrenia economic evaluations.

Objective: The aim of this study is to review the existing economic evaluations of antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia and summarize the evidence and methods applied.

Methods: An electronic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO host, The Cochrane Library and ScienceDirect from January 2014 to December 2020. Search terms included “schizophrenia,” “schizophrenic,” “pharmacoeconomic,” “economic evaluation,” “cost-effectiveness,” and “cost-utility.” The Literature was screened and extracted by two researchers independently and assessed with the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) List and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) Statement.

Results: A total of 25 studies were included in the review. The regions included Europe, North America, Asia and Africa. Most of the studies chose second-generation antipsychotics as comparators and integrated treatment sequences. Time horizons varied from 1 year to lifetime. The healthcare sector was the most common perspective, accordingly, most of the evaluations considered only direct medical costs. The Markov model and decision tree model were the most common choices. Adverse events, compliance and persistence were considered important parameters. Quality-adjusted life-years were the major outcomes applied to the economic evaluations. All utilities for health states and adverse events were collected from published literature. All of the studies applied uncertainty analysis to explore the robustness of the results. The quality of the studies was generally satisfactory. However, improvements were needed in the choice of time horizons, the measurements of outcomes and the descriptions of assumptions.

Conclusions: This study highlights the methodology of economic evaluation of schizophrenia. Recommendations for modeling method and future study are provided.

Appraisal of patient-level health economic models of severe mental illness: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Healthcare decision makers require accurate long-term economic models to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of new mental health interventions.

AIMS

To assess the suitability of current patient-level economic models to estimate long-term economic outcomes in severe mental illness.

METHOD

We undertook pre-specified systematic searches in MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO to identify reviews and stand-alone publications of economic models of interventions for schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder (PROSPERO: CRD42020158243). We screened paper titles and abstracts to identify unique patient-level economic models. We conducted a structured extraction of identified models, recording the presence of key predefined model features. Model quality and validation were appraised using the 2014 ISPOR and 2016 AdViSHE model checklists.

RESULTS

We identified 15 unique patient-level models for psychosis and major depressive disorder from 1481 non-duplicate records. Models addressed schizophrenia (n = 6), bipolar disorder (n = 2) and major depressive disorder (n = 7). The predominant model type was discrete event simulation (n = 9). Model complexity and incorporation of patient heterogeneity varied considerably, and only five models extrapolated costs and outcomes over a lifetime horizon. Key model parameters were often based on low-quality evidence, and checklist quality assessment revealed weak model verification procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing patient-level economic models of interventions for severe mental illness have considerable limitations. New modelling efforts must be supplemented by the generation of good-quality, contemporary evidence suitable for model building. Combined effort across the research community is required to build and validate economic extrapolation models suitable for accurately assessing the long-term value of new interventions from short-term clinical trial data.

Use of olanzapine compared with clozapine for treatment-resistant schizophrenia in a real-world setting: nationwide register-based study

BACKGROUND

Clozapine is generally considered as the treatment of choice for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS). However, its superiority has recently been questioned because olanzapine has been suggested as non-inferior to clozapine in its effectiveness.

AIMS

We aimed to investigate the current status of clozapine prescriptions to identify any disparity between clinical guidelines and real-world practices.

METHOD

In this study, we utilised the Health Insurance Review Agency database in the Republic of Korea to investigate the real-world effectiveness of clozapine for patients with TRS. We compared differences in patient variables before and after clozapine administration, and we also performed survival analyses for both psychiatric admissions and emergency room visits among patients who used clozapine or olanzapine.

RESULTS

This study investigated an incident cohort of 64 442 patients, and 2338 patients have been prescribed clozapine. Of these, 998 patients had TRS. In survival analysis, clozapine showed a worse survival rate for psychiatric admissions than olanzapine (hazard ratio 0.615). We also identified that clinicians tended to try a number of antipsychotics, as recommended, before starting patients on clozapine.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, we found that olanzapine led to higher survival rates for psychiatric admissions than clozapine. Thus, considering the risk of serious adverse effects, clozapine may be used conservatively. Considering several studies advocating superior efficacy of clozapine, further studies with extensive data are recommended.

Cost and health impacts of adherence to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence schizophrenia guideline recommendations

BACKGROUND

Discrepancies between the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) schizophrenia guideline recommendations and current clinical practice in the UK have been reported.

AIMS

We aim to assess whether it is cost-effective to improve adherence to the NICE schizophrenia guideline recommendations, compared with current practice.

METHOD

A previously developed whole-disease model for schizophrenia, using the discrete event simulation method, was adapted to assess the cost and health impacts of adherence to the NICE recommendations. Three scenarios to improve adherence to the clinical guidelines were modelled: universal provision of cognitive-behavioural therapy for patients at clinical high risk of psychosis, universal provision of family intervention for patients with first-episode psychosis and prompt provision of clozapine for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia. The primary outcomes were lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years gained.

RESULTS

The results suggest full adherence to the guideline recommendations would decrease cost and improve quality-adjusted life-years. Based on the NICE willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000-£30 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, prompt provision of clozapine for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia results in the greatest net monetary benefit, followed by universal provision of cognitive-behavioural therapy for patients at clinical high risk of psychosis, and universal provision of family intervention for patients with first-episode psychosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that adherence to guideline recommendations would decrease cost and improve quality-adjusted life-years. Greater investment is needed to improve guideline adherence and therefore improve patient quality of life and realise potential cost savings.

Preventive interventions for individuals at ultra high risk for psychosis: An updated and extended meta-analysis

Intervention at the earliest illness stage, in ultra or clinical high-risk individuals, or indicated prevention, currently represents the most promising strategy to ameliorate, delay or prevent psychosis. We review the current state of evidence and conduct a broad-spectrum meta-analysis of various outcomes: transition to psychosis, attenuated positive and negative psychotic symptoms, mania, depression, anxiety, general psychopathology, symptom-related distress, functioning, quality of life, and treatment acceptability. 26 randomized controlled trials were included. Meta-analytically pooled interventions reduced transition rate (risk ratio [RR] = 0.57, 95%CI 0.41-0.81) and attenuated positive psychotic symptoms at 12-months (standardized mean difference = -0.15, 95%CI = -0.28--0.01). When stratified by intervention type (pharmacological, psychological), only the pooled effect of psychological interventions on transition rate was significant. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) was associated with a reduction in incidence at 12-months (RR = 0.52, 95%CI = 0.33-0.82) and 18-48-months (RR = 0.60, 95%CI = 0.42-0.84), but not 6-months. Findings at 12-months and 18-48-months were robust in sensitivity and subgroup analyses. All other outcomes were non-significant. To date, effects of trialed treatments are specific to transition and, a lesser extent, attenuated positive symptoms, highlighting the future need to target other symptom domains and functional outcomes. Sound evidence supports CBT in reducing transition and the value of intervening at this illness stage. STUDY REGISTRATION: Research Registry ID: reviewregistry907.

[Inpatient equivalent treatment : A new form of care also in gerontopsychiatry]

Seit 2018 ist es nach einer Novellierung des SGB V psychiatrischen Kliniken möglich, stationäre aufsuchende Behandlung im Lebensumfeld psychiatrisch Erkrankter zu realisieren. Dabei sind besondere Strukturmerkmale und Dokumentationspflichten zu beachten. So muss dem Behandlungsteam neben einem Mitglied der ärztlichen und der pflegerischen Berufsgruppe auch mindestens ein Mitglied einer dritten Berufsgruppe angehören (z. B. Ergotherapie, Sozialarbeit, Physiotherapie). Die Leistungsvergütung wird zwischen der jeweiligen Klinik und den Krankenkassen verhandelt und schließt, regional divergent, Abrechnungen nach Pauschalen, nach geleisteten Minuten oder gemischte Modelle ein. Aus psychiatrisch-psychotherapeutischer Sicht bietet die Behandlung gerontopsychiatrischer Patienten in ihrem Wohnumfeld und damit in ihren sozialen Kontexten viele Vorteile. Voraussetzung für ein Gelingen dieses Ansatzes ist ein auch in somatischen Erkrankungen erfahrenes und logistisch hochflexibles multiprofessionelles Behandlungsteam. Unter den Bedingungen der Coronapandemie stellen sich besondere Herausforderungen aufgrund der Besuchsverbote in Pflegeheimen und der mit aufsuchender Arbeit verbundenen Infektionsgefahr für Patienten und Mitglieder des Behandlungsteams.