Healthcare costs of atypical antipsychotic use for patients with bipolar disorder in a Medicaid programme

Costs of psychotropics for outpatients with bipolar disorder in Japan; the MUSUBI 2016 survey

BACKGROUND

Although the costs of bipolar disorder (BD) treatments are associated with local and universal factors, data from non-Western countries remain limited. The associations between clinical features and costs of outpatient pharmacotherapy have not been well characterize. To estimate the costs of outpatient BD treatments and their associations with clinical features in a Japanese population, we investigated with special reference to the costs of medicines constituted the bulk of the total healthcare expense and were steadily increasing.

METHODS

The Multicenter Treatment Survey for Bipolar Disorder (MUSUBI) retrospectively evaluated 3130 patients with BD who visited 176 Japanese psychiatric outpatient clinics in 2016. Clinical features and drug prescriptions were recorded, and the total daily costs of psychotropic drug treatment were calculated. The annual medical costs related to outpatient BD treatments in Japan were estimated based on the corresponding demographics. The associations between daily medical costs and patients' clinical features were analyzed using multiple regression analysis.

RESULTS

The daily costs of psychotropic drugs ranged from zero to JPY3245 (mean, JPY349 equivalent to USD32.5) and were exponentially distributed. The annual costs for outpatients BD treatments were approximately 51.9 billion Japanese yens (519 million US dollars). Subsequent multiple regression analysis revealed that social adjustment, depressive symptoms, age, rapid cycling, psychotic symptoms, and comorbid mental disorders correlated strongly with the daily cost of psychotropic drugs.

CONCLUSION

The estimated annual costs for outpatient BD treatment in Japan were equivalent to those in OECD countries (except for the US) and higher than those in some Asian countries. The cost of psychotropic treatments was associated with individual characteristics and psychopathological conditions.Key MessagesPsychotropic treatment for an outpatient with bipolar disorder has a daily cost approximately JPY350.The annual outpatient treatment cost for bipolar disorder in Japan was estimated to 51.9 billion Japanese yen in 2016.Individual characteristics and psychopathological conditions affected the cost of drug treatment.

Real-World Patterns of Utilization and Costs Associated with Second-Generation Oral Antipsychotic Medication for the Treatment of Bipolar Disorder: A Literature Review

OBJECTIVE

Treatment with second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) for bipolar disorder, including bipolar I disorder (BD-I), is common. This review evaluated real-world utilization patterns with oral SGAs in the United States (US) for bipolar disorder (and BD-I specifically when reported) and economic burden associated with these patterns.

METHODS

Structured, systematic searches of MEDLINE^®, EMBASE^®, and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database identified primary research studies (published 2008-2018) describing real-world SGA use in adults with bipolar disorder/BD-I.

RESULTS

Among 769 studies screened, 39 met inclusion criteria. Most studies (72%) were analyses of commercial or Medicare/Medicaid claims databases. Patient-related (eg, demographic, comorbidities) and disease-related (eg, mania, psychosis) factors were associated with prescribed SGA. Suboptimal utilization patterns (ie, nonadherence, nonpersistence, treatment gaps, medication switching, and discontinuation) were common for patients treated with SGAs. Also common were SGAs prescribed with another psychotropic medication and SGA combination treatment (use of ≥2 SGAs concurrently). Suboptimal adherence and SGA combination treatment were both associated with increased health care resource use (HCRU); suboptimal adherence was associated with higher total direct medical and indirect costs.

LIMITATIONS

Different definitions for populations and concepts limited between-study comparisons. Focusing on SGAs limits contextualizing findings within the broader treatment landscape (eg, lithium, anticonvulsants). Given the nature of claims data, prescribing rationale (eg, acute episodes vs maintenance) and factors influencing observed utilization patterns could not be fully derived.

CONCLUSION

Despite increased use of SGAs to treat bipolar disorder over the last decade, reports of suboptimal utilization patterns of SGAs (eg, nonadherence, nonpersistence) were common as was combination treatment. Patterns of SGA use associated with additional HCRU and/or costs were suboptimal adherence and SGA combination treatment; economic consequences associated with other utilization patterns (eg, nonpersistence) were unclear. Strategies to improve SGA treatment continuity, particularly adherence, may improve clinical and economic outcomes among people living with bipolar disorder.

The Economic Burden of Bipolar Disorder in the United States: A Systematic Literature Review

Bipolar disorder (BD) is a mood disorder with subtypes characterized by episodes of mania, hypomania, and/or depression. BD is associated with substantial economic burden, and the bipolar I disorder (BD-I) subtype is associated with high medical costs. This review further evaluated the economic burden of BD and BD-I in the United States (US), describing health-care resource utilization (HCRU) and sources of direct medical and indirect costs. Data were obtained from systematic searches of MEDLINE^®, EMBASE^®, and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database. Citations were screened to identify primary research studies (published 2008-2018) on the economic burden of BD/BD-I or its treatment in real-world settings. Reported costs were converted to 2018 US dollars. Of identified abstracts (N=4111), 56 studies were included. The estimated total annual national economic burden of BD/BD-I was more than $195 billion, with approximately 25% attributed to direct medical costs. Individuals with BD/BD-I used health-care services more frequently and had higher direct medical costs than matched individuals without the disease. Drivers of higher direct costs included frequent psychiatric interventions, presence of comorbid medical/psychiatric conditions, and both suboptimal medication adherence and clinical management. Indirect costs (eg, unemployment, lost work productivity for patients/caregivers) accounted for 72-80% of the national economic burden of BD/BD-I. Different definitions for study populations and cost categories limited comparisons of economic outcomes. This review builds on existing literature describing the economic burden of BD and confirmed cost drivers of BD/BD-I. Improved clinical management of BD/BD-I and associated comorbidities, together with better medication adherence, may reduce health-care costs and improve patient outcomes.

Estimating the Impact of Adherence to and Persistence with Atypical Antipsychotic Therapy on Health Care Costs and Risk of Hospitalization

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To estimate the impact of adherence to and persistence with atypical antipsychotics on health care costs and risk of hospitalization by controlling potential sources of endogeneity.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study using medical and pharmacy claims data.

DATA SOURCE

Humana health care insurance database.

PATIENTS

A total of 32,374 patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder and who had a prescription for noninjectable atypical antipsychotics (aripiprazole, asenapine, clozapine, iloperidone, lurasidone, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone, or ziprasidone), after a washout period of at least 180 days during which there was no use of any atypical antipsychotics, between January 2007 and June 2013.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The effects of adherence (proportion of days covered by all atypical antipsychotic prescription fills) to and persistence (time from initiation to discontinuation of therapy) with atypical antipsychotics on outcomes (all-cause total health care costs, medication costs, medical services costs, and inpatient admissions) were examined. To exclude potential bias due to mutual causality between drug use patterns and health care utilization, the effects of adherence and persistence measured in the first year on outcomes measured in the second year were investigated. Instrumental variable regressions using reimbursement rate and mail order as instrumental variables were conducted to correct potential endogeneity due to omitted variable bias. Being adherent decreased total costs by $19,497 (p<0.05), increased medication costs by $8194 (p<0.001), decreased medical services costs by $27,664 (p<0.001), and reduced hospitalization risk by 27% (p<0.001). Being persistent decreased individual total costs by $23,927 (p<0.05), increased medication costs by $10,278 (p<0.001), and decreased medical services costs by $34,178 (p<0.001). We could not identify a significant association between persistence and the risk of hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

Good adherence to and persistence with atypical antipsychotics led to lower total costs than poor adherence and persistence. Thus efforts should be made to improve adherence and persistence in patients taking atypical antipsychotics.

Health Care Utilization and Treatment Persistence Associated with Oral Paliperidone and Lurasidone in Schizophrenia Treatment

BACKGROUND

Oral paliperidone and lurasidone are new second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs). Empirical evidence on the comparative costs and persistence of these 2 agents are absent in the literature.

OBJECTIVE

To assess health care use and persistence associated with the 2 new agents oral paliperidone and lurasidone and other SGAs.

METHODS

Schizophrenia patients who initiated SGA therapy were identified in the January 2007-June 2013 claims databases of a large managed care organization. Multivariate regressions using aripiprazole as the comparator were conducted. Ordinary least squares regressions were used to estimate the total medical and pharmacy costs associated with each drug. Poisson regressions were conducted to evaluate the frequency of hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits associated with each drug. A censored regression model was used to evaluate the comparative persistence. Sensitivity analyses using generalized linear models, two-part models, hurdle models, and instrumental variable regressions were also performed.  

RESULTS

Compared with aripiprazole, paliperidone was not associated with significantly different total costs, yet lurasidone was associated with lower total costs (-$7,052; 95% CI = -$9,221, -$4,882). Lurasidone was also associated with significantly lower medical services costs (-$5,025; 95% CI = -$7,096, -$2,955), drug costs (-$2,026; 95% CI = -$2,695, -$1,357), hospital costs (-$3,026; 95% CI = -$4,731, -$1,321), outpatient costs (-$1,999; 95% CI = -$2,536, -$1,463), and ED costs (-$2,284; 95% CI = -$3,069, -$1,499), whereas paliperidone did not have significant effects on any types of costs. Paliperidone users had fewer ED visits (-0.25; 95% CI = -0.42, -0.08), while lurasidone users had fewer hospitalizations (-5.98; 95% CI = -6.61, -5.35) and fewer ED visits (-2.51; 95% CI = -2.92, -2.10). Both paliperidone and lurasidone were associated with lower levels of treatment persistence.

CONCLUSIONS

Paliperidone does not associate with lower total costs compared with commonly used SGAs, whereas lurasidone is associated with lower total health costs. Thus, high access fees of lurasidone are not necessarily a major concern in prescription.

Payer types associated with antipsychotic polypharmacy in an ambulatory care setting

Objectives

Antipsychotic polypharmacy is increasingly prescribed despite little documented evidence of a therapeutic benefit. There is also a limited understanding of the role that health insurance plays on the prevalence of antipsychotic polypharmacy. This study was undertaken to investigate the relationship between antipsychotic polypharmacy and individuals' intended source of payment in a US national sample of ambulatory care patients.

Methods

The study combined 2002, 2003 and 2004 data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) among adults seeking outpatient-based physician medical care services in the USA. We investigated characteristic differences among patients who were prescribed multiple antipsychotics versus individuals receiving only a single antipsychotic medication. Multivariable logistic regression examined the association between antipsychotic polypharmacy and patients' primary payment type classified as private insurance, Medicaid, Medicare or other (primarily out-of-pocket) payment type.

Key findings

Use of more than one antipsychotic agent was recorded in 68 of 830 (8.2%) outpatient physician visits in the 3-year period 2002–2004. Among the payer types studied, Medicaid payment status was correlated with increased risk of antipsychotic polypharmacy (odds ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 1.1–6.7).

Conclusions

Insurance status was associated with antipsychotic polypharmacy among non-institutionalized US residents prescribed antipsychotic medications. Patients reporting Medicaid as their primary payer were nearly three times as likely to be prescribed multiple antipsychotic drugs, potentially increasing their risk of adverse side effects as well as greater taxpayer burden. Future research should determine whether these trends continued after 2004 and to determine the costs of treating patients in the public sector with multiple antipsychotic drugs, a common scenario despite financial pressures and uncertain medical benefit.