Clinical and Economic Outcomes of Olanzapine Compared With Haloperidol for Schizophrenia
- 58 Downloads
Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare, from the payor perspective, the clinical and economic outcomes of olanzapine to those of haloperidol for the treatment of schizophrenia.
Design and setting: Clinical, quality-of-life and resource utilisation data were prospectively collected for US-residing patients with schizophrenia who were participating in a multicentre, randomised, double-blind clinical trial comparing olanzapine and haloperidol. Direct medical costs were estimated by assigning standardised prices (1995 values) to the resource utilisation data.
Patients and participants: 817 patients with schizophrenia who had a baseline Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale score (BPRS) ≥18 (items scored 0 to 6) and/or were no longer tolerating current antipsychotic therapy.
Interventions: Olanzapine 5 to 20 mg/day (n = 551) or haloperidol 5 to 20 mg/day (n = 266) for 6 weeks. Patients showing a predefined level of clinical response entered a 46-week maintenance phase.
Main outcome measures and results: After acute treatment, BPRS-based clinical improvements were seen in 38 and 27% of olanzapine and haloperidol patients, respectively (p = 0.002). Clinically important improvements on the Quality of Life Scale were achieved during acute treatment in 33% of olanzapine recipients and 25% of haloperidol recipients (p = 0.094). Olanzapine treatment in the acute phase led to significantly lower inpatient ($US5125 vs $US5795, p = 0.038) and outpatient ($US663 vs $US692, p = 0.001) costs, resulting in a significant overall reduction in mean total medical costs of $US388 (p = 0.033). This significant reduction in total costs was found despite olanzapine mean medication costs being significantly greater than haloperidol medication costs ($US326 vs $US15, p < 0.001). No significant differences in clinical improvement were observed in the maintenance phase. Maintenance phase olanzapine mean total medical costs were $US636 lower than haloperidol total costs (p = 0.128). Although olanzapine medication costs were significantly higher than haloperidol medication costs ($US3461 vs $US95, p < 0.001), this difference was offset by significantly lower inpatient ($US8322 vs $US10 662, p = 0.044) and outpatient ($US3810 vs $US5473, p = 0.038) costs.
Conclusions: In this study, olanzapine treatment was more effective than haloperidol in producing clinical response in the acute phase. In addition, olanzapine treatment led to reductions in inpatient and outpatient costs that more than offset olanzapine’s higher medication costs relative to haloperidol.
KeywordsSchizophrenia Adis International Limited Haloperidol Clozapine Olanzapine
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 5.Bromer EJ, Dew MA, Eaton W. Epidemiology of psychosis with special reference to schizophrenia. In: Tsuang MT, Tohen M, Zahner GEP, editors. Textbook in psychiatric epidemiology. New York (NY): John Wiley & Sons, 1996: 283–300Google Scholar
- 6.Keith SJ, Regier DA, Rae DS. Schizophrenic disorders. In: Robins LN, Regier DA, editors. Psychiatric disorders in America: the epidemiologic catchment area study. New York (NY): Free Press, 1991Google Scholar
- 7.Rice D, Miller L. The economic burden of schizophrenia. The 6th Biennial Research Conference on Economics in Mental Health; 1992 Sep 21-22; Bethesda (MD), 21–2Google Scholar
- 8.Rice D, Miller L. The economic burden of schizophrenia: conceptual and methodological issues, and cost estimates. In: Moscarelli M, Rupp A, Sartorius N, editors. Handbook of mental health economics and health policy. Vol. 1. New York (NY): John Wiley & Sons, 1996: 321–34Google Scholar
- 12.Hegerty JD, Baldessarini RJ, Tohen M, et al. One hundred years of schizophrenia: a meta-analysis of the outcome literature. Am J Psychiatry 1994; 151: 1409–16Google Scholar
- 28.Guest JF, Hart WM, Cookson RF, et al. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of long-term treatment with risperidone for patients with chronic schizophrenia. Br J Med Econ 1996; 10: 59–67Google Scholar
- 29.Frank RG. Clozapine’s cost-benefits [letter]. Hosp Community Psychiatry 1991; 42: 92Google Scholar
- 34.Mahmoud RA, Engelhart LM, Oster G, et al. Risperidone versus conventional antipsychotics: a prospective randomized naturalistic effectiveness trial of outcomes in chronic schizophrenia. 36th Annual Meeting of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology; 1997 Dec 8-12; Kamuela (HA)Google Scholar
- 37.Beasley CM. Olanzapine versus placebo and haloperidol: acute phase results of the North American double-blind olanzapine trial. Response. Neuropsychopharmacology 1997; 16: 89–90Google Scholar
- 39.Revicki DA, Genduso L, Hamilton S, et al. Olanzapine versus haloperidol in the treatment of schizophrenia and other related psychotic disorders: quality of life and clinical outcomes of a randomised clinical trial. Qual Life Res. In pressGoogle Scholar
- 40.Tollefson G. Long-term continuation therapy with olanzapine: New Clinical Drug Evaluation Unit (NCDEU) Program. NCDEU Meeting; 1997 May 27-30; Boca Raton (FL)Google Scholar
- 41.Dellva MA, Tran P, Tollefson GD, et al. Standard olanzapine versus placebo and ineffective-dose olanzapine in the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia. Psychiatr Serv 1997; 46: 1571–7Google Scholar
- 42.Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 1987Google Scholar
- 44.Guy W, editor. ECDEU Assessment manual for psychopharmacology. Rockville (MD): US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (DHEW), 1976. DHEW publication no. (ADM): 76–338Google Scholar
- 45.Kay SR, Opler LA, Fiszbein A. Positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) manual. North Tonawanda (NY): Multi- Health Systems, Inc., 1986Google Scholar
- 47.International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, Clinical Modification. 4th ed. Los Angeles (CA): Practice Management Information Corporation (PMIC), 1993Google Scholar
- 50.Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, et al., editors. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York (NY): Oxford University Press, 1996Google Scholar
- 51.Payment for part B medical and other health services. Fed Regist 1994; 59: 235Google Scholar
- 53.Dwyer DS, Mitchell OS, Cole R, et al. Evaluating mental health capitation treatment: lessons from panel data. Cambridge (MA): National Bureau of Economic Research, 1995Google Scholar
- 54.US Bureau of Labor Statistics. CPI detailed report. Washington, DC: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor, 1995Google Scholar
- 56.National Association of Psychiatric Health Systems. Trends in psychiatric health systems: 1995 annual survey, final report. Washington, DC: National Association of Psychiatric Health Systems, 1995Google Scholar
- 57.Physicians GenRx. 5th ed. St. Louis (MO): Mosby-Year Book, 1995Google Scholar
- 58.Red Book pharmacy’s fundamental reference. Montville (NJ): Medical Economics Data Production Company, 1995Google Scholar
- 63.SAS Institute, Inc. SAS/STAT user’s guide. Vols. 1 & 2. 4th ed. Version 6. Cary (NC): SAS Institute, Inc., 1990Google Scholar