首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy >Comparative Treatment Patterns, Resource Utilization, and Costs in Stimulant-Treated Children with ADHD Who Require Subsequent Pharmacotherapy with Atypical Antipsychotics Versus Non-Antipsychotics
【24h】

Comparative Treatment Patterns, Resource Utilization, and Costs in Stimulant-Treated Children with ADHD Who Require Subsequent Pharmacotherapy with Atypical Antipsychotics Versus Non-Antipsychotics

机译:需要进行后续非典型抗精神病药物治疗与非抗精神病药物治疗的多动症兴奋性治疗儿童的比较治疗方式,资源利用和费用

获取原文
       

摘要

BACKGROUND: Although not indicated for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) are commonly prescribed for children with ADHD. The treatment patterns, resource utilization, and costs associated with AAPs relative to non-antipsychotic medications have not been evaluated for children with ADHD. OBJECTIVE: To compare treatment patterns, resource utilization, and costs to U.S. third party payers between stimulant-treated ADHD children who switch to or augment their stimulant treatment with AAPs (risperidone, aripiprazole, quetiapine, olanzapine, ziprasidone, paliperidone, and clozapine) compared with non-antipsychotic medications (atomoxetine, clonidine immediate-release (IR), guanfacine IR, dexmethylphenidate, mixed amphetamine salts, methylphenidate, lisdexamfetamine, and dextroamphetamine). METHODS: Patients with at least one ADHD diagnosis (ICD-9-CM codes 314.00 or 314.01) and at least one stimulant medication claim between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2009, were identified from a large U.S. commercial medical/pharmacy claims database. Patients were classified into the AAP cohort if they had a claim for an AAP following a stimulant fill or into the non-antipsychotic cohort if they had a claim for a non-antipsychotic medication after a stimulant fill and no AAP claims. The index date was defined as the date of the first fill of the AAP or a randomly selected eligible non-antipsychotic medication. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were aged 6-12 as of the index date and had at least 18 months of continuous eligibility. Patients were excluded if they had a psychiatric diagnosis for which AAPs were approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or commonly used. Patients in the non-antipsychotic group were matched 1:1 to patients in the AAP group using a propensity score generated from a logistic regression that included demographics, treatments, resource utilization, and comorbidities during the 6 months prior to the index date. All outcomes were measured during the 12 months following the index date. Treatment patterns were compared using Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimates and Cox proportional hazards models. Annual resource utilization was compared using McNemar’s test and Poisson regression. Costs were estimated from the perspective of U.S. third-party payers and were adjusted to 2010 dollars using the medical component of the Consumer Price Index. Both all-cause and mental health-related costs were examined and compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. RESULTS: Of the 22,622 patients with ADHD identified to have used AAPs after a stimulant, 15,664 (69%) patients did not have a psychiatric diagnosis for which AAPs were FDA-indicated or commonly used. Among the 84,558 patients using non-antipsychotics after a stimulant, 81,397 (96%) did not have such psychiatric diagnoses. A total of 2,127 children in the AAP cohort and 16,508 children in the non-antipsychotic cohort met all of the study inclusion criteria. After propensity score matching, 1,857 children (358 switchers and 1,499 augmenters) were included in each of the matched cohorts. The baseline characteristics were well balanced between the matched cohorts. In the 12 months post-index date, children treated with AAPs were more likely to experience switching (KM: 17.2% vs. 10.4% at 12 months; HR?=?1.75) and augmentation (KM: 43.4% vs. 22.4% at 12 months; HR?=?2.62) than the non-antipsychotic group (both P? less than ?0.001). Rates of discontinuation were similar between groups (KM: 71.8% vs. 71.7% at 12 months; HR?=?0.98, P?=?0.600). The AAP cohort also had higher mean numbers of hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and outpatient visits (0.08 vs. 0.03, 0.34 vs. 0.25, 14.1 vs. 12.7 per patient, respectively; event rate ratios?=?2.61, 1.33, and 1.11, respectively; all P? less than ?0.001). The AAP group also incurred higher all-cause mean medical, prescription drug, and total health care costs compared with the non-antipsychotic group ($3,090 vs. $2,238; $3,844 vs. $2,509; $6,934 vs. $4,748, respectively; all P? less than ?0.001). Patients in the AAP group also incurred higher mean total, medical, and drug costs related to mental health ($5,057 vs. $2,859; $1,555 vs. $964; $3,502 vs. $1,895, respectively; all P? less than ?0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Stimulant-treated children with ADHD who switched to or augmented with AAPs versus non-antipsychotics had significantly greater rates of subsequent augmentation and health care resource utilization as well as higher total health care costs. Further research and/or drug utilization reviews may be warranted to fully evaluate the clinical and economic outcomes of pediatric ADHD patients who are receiving AAPs.
机译:背景:尽管没有针对注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)进行治疗,但非典型抗精神病药(AAP)通常用于患有ADHD的儿童。尚未针对患有ADHD的儿童评估与非抗精神病药物相关的AAP的治疗方式,资源利用和成本。目的:比较使用AAP(利培酮,阿立哌唑,喹硫平,奥氮平,齐拉西酮,帕潘立酮和氯氮平)进行兴奋剂治疗的ADHD儿童的治疗方式,资源利用和美国第三方付款方的费用之间的比较使用非抗精神病药物(atomoxetine,可乐定速释(IR),胍法辛IR,右旋哌醋甲酯,混合的苯丙胺盐,哌醋甲酯,赖氨酸安非他命和右旋苯丙胺)。方法:从大型美国商业医疗/药房索赔数据库中识别出在2005年1月1日至2009年12月31日期间至少有一项ADHD诊断(ICD-9-CM代码314.00或314.01)和至少一项兴奋剂药物索赔的患者。 。如果在兴奋剂填充后对AAP有要求,则将患者分类为AAP队列;在兴奋剂填充后对无抗精神病用药而要求且无AAP要求的患者,将其分类为非抗精神病队列。索引日期定义为AAP首次填充或随机选择的合格非抗精神病药物的日期。如果患者在索引日期的年龄为6-12岁,并且具有至少18个月的连续资格,则符合入选条件。如果患者具有AAP被美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)批准或经常使用的精神病诊断,则将其排除在外。非抗精神病药组的患者与AAP组的患者以logistic回归生成的倾向评分1:1匹配,该倾向评分包括指标日期前6个月的人口统计学,治疗,资源利用和合并症。所有结果均在索引日期后的12个月内进行测量。使用Kaplan-Meier(KM)估计值和Cox比例风险模型比较治疗模式。使用McNemar检验和Poisson回归比较了年度资源利用率。费用是从美国第三方付款方的角度估算的,并使用“消费者价格指数”中的医疗部分调整为2010年的美元。使用Wilcoxon秩和检验对所有原因和与精神健康相关的费用进行了检查和比较。结果:在22622名经兴奋剂鉴定为使用AAP的ADHD患者中,有15664名(69%)患者没有经FDA指示或通常使用AAP的精神病诊断。在84,558例使用兴奋剂后使用非抗精神病药的患者中,有81,397例(96%)没有这种精神病学诊断。 AAP队列中共有2127名儿童,非抗精神病性队列中共有16508例儿童符合所有研究纳入标准。倾向得分匹配后,每个匹配的队列中都包括1857名儿童(358名切换员和1499名扩充员)。在匹配的队列之间基线特征很好地平衡。在索引后的12个月中,接受AAP治疗的儿童更容易发生转换(KM:17.2%比12个月时的10.4%;HR≥1.75)和增强(KM:43.4%比22.4%)。 12个月; HR≥2.62)高于非抗精神病药组(均P≤0.001)。两组间的停药率相似(KM:12个月时为71.8%vs. 71.7%;HR≥0.98,P≥0.600)。 AAP队列的平均住院次数,急诊室就诊次数和门诊次数也更高(每位患者分别为0.08比0.03、0.34比0.25、14.1比12.7;事件发生率比== 2.61、1.33和1.11 ,所有P?均小于0.001)。与非抗精神病药组相比,AAP组的全因平均医疗,处方药和总体医疗保健费用更高(分别为$ 3,090比$ 2,238; $ 3,844比$ 2,509; $ 6,934比$ 4,748;所有P?均小于0.001)。 AAP组患者的心理健康总平均费用,医疗费用和药物费用也较高(分别为$ 5,057比$ 2,859; $ 1,555比$ 964; $ 3,502比$ 1,895;所有P <0.001)。结论:与非抗精神病药相比,接受AAP或多用AAP进行刺激治疗的ADHD儿童,其随后的增强和医疗资源利用率更高,总医疗费用也更高。可能需要进行进一步的研究和/或药物利用评价,以全面评估接受AAP的小儿ADHD患者的临床和经济结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号