Economic considerations of cognition and functional outcomes in patients with schizophrenia: A systematic literature review

摘要

Background The primary focus of research in schizophrenia has been on the positive symptoms, with findings that clearly establish their economic burden. More recently, research has expanded to focus on another core symptom of schizophrenia, namely cognitive impairments. While this work has established the adverse impact of cognitive impairments associated with schizophrenia (CIAS) on functional outcomes, their relationship to the economic impact of schizophrenia has not been systematically evaluated. Objective The aim of this research was to perform a systematic literature review identifying evidence that evaluates: 1) the economic impact of CIAS and its treatments, including health-state utilities, and 2) the economic evidence associated with improvements in the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) Consensus Cognitive Battery and the University of California Performance Skills Assessment (UPSA). Method A systematic search of articles published from January 1999–April 2013 was conducted. Studies reporting direct costs, indirect costs, and quality of life impacts of CIAS and costs of CIAS interventions were reviewed. Results Forty-three studies met inclusion criteria. Twenty-four focused on indirect costs (work-related outcomes) associated with cognitive impairments and 14 studies included residential status outcomes. Four studies concentrated on the direct cost of cognitive remediation therapy. Three studies reported quality of life outcomes, but none used health-state utilities. Eight studies focused on the UPSA and its relationship to community outcomes. Only two studies were cost-effectiveness analyses. Conclusions Despite the growing scientific literature relating CIAS to adverse outcomes, the translation of outcomes into economic outcomes is seldom reported. Should novel pharmacotherapies and/or psychosocial treatments require reimbursement from health authorities and/or other payers, many gaps warrant attention in order to demonstrate the economic value of these therapies.