Advertisement

PharmacoEconomics

, Volume 20, Issue 8, pp 499–511 | Cite as

Methods for Claims-Based Pharmacoeconomic Studies in Psychosis

  • Frank Gianfrancesco
  • Ruey-Hua Wang
  • Ramy Mahmoud
  • Richard White
Current Opinion

Abstract

Pharmacoeconomic studies using claims data are frequently employed to compare the healthcare costs associated with competing drugs. Different methodological approaches with varying limitations for evaluating claims data are reviewed within the context of psychosis. Intent-to-treat paradigms and mirror-image designs have limitations that can bias comparisons of health resource use and can be addressed through the use of drug treatment episodes. Health resource use is better measured in financial rather than volume amounts, to account for service intensity. However, financial measures reported in claims records need to be carefully chosen. Between-group comparisons are frequently affected by selection bias, and within-group comparisons are often limited by period bias. While selection bias can be addressed by controlling for patient factors such as disease severity, and period bias by controlling for trend, devising appropriate control measures from the limited information in claims data can be challenging. Healthcare data are often skewed, which affects statistical testing. While skewed data are commonly handled through log transformation, this method has serious limitations, potentially distorting pharmacoeconomic comparisons. Determining the most appropriate methods for claims-based data involves careful evaluation of the alternate approaches to best achieve the goals of a pharmacoeconomic investigation.

Keywords

Risperidone Healthcare Cost Drug Product Health Resource Treatment Episode 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by Janssen Pharmaceutical Products, L.P., Titusville, NJ, USA. The authors have no conflicts of interests.

References

  1. 1.
    Rizzo JD, Powe NR. Methodological hurdles in conducting pharmacoeconomic analyses. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 15: 339–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Byford S, Palmer S. Common errors and controversies in pharmacoeconomic analyses. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13: 659–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Siegel JE, Torrance GW, Russell LB, et al. Guidelines for pharmacoeconomic studies: recommendations from the panel on cost effectiveness in health and medicine. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 11: 159–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gray AM, Marshall M, Lockwood A, et al. Problems in conducting economic evaluations alongside clinical trials: lessons from a study of casemanagement for people with mental disorders. Br J Psychiatry 1997; 170: 47–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rajagopalan R, Kallal JE, Fowler Jr JF, et al. Practical issues in conducting pharmacoeconomic studies. Clin Ther 1996; 18: 1298–306PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Simon G, Wagner E, Vonkorff M. Cost-effectiveness comparisons using ‘real world’ randomized trials: the case of new antidepressant drugs. J Clin Epidemiol 1995; 48: 363–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Drummond MF, Davies L. Economic analysis alongside clinical trials. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1991; 7: 561–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Birnbaum HG, Cremieux PY, Greenberg PE, et al. Using healthcare claims data for outcomes research and pharmacoeconomic analyses. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 16 (1): 1–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Motheral BR, Fairman KA. The use of claims databases for outcomes research: rationale, challenges, and strategies. Clin Ther 1997; 19: 346–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Glazer WM, Johnstone BM. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of antipsychotic therapy for schizophrenia. J Clin Psychiatry 1997; 58 Suppl. 10: 50–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Albright PS, Livingstone S, Keegan DL, et al. Reduction of healthcare resource utilisation and costs following the use of risperidone for patients with schizophrenia previously treated with standard antipsychotic therapy: a retrospective analysis using the Saskatchewan Health Linkable Databases. Clin Drug Invest 1996; 11: 289–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Viale G, Mechling L, Maislin G, et al. Impact of risperidone on the use of mental health care resources. Psychiatr Serv 1997; 48: 1153–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Carter C, Stevens M, Durkin M. Effects of risperidone therapy on the use of mental health care resources in Salt Lake County, Utah. Clin Ther 1998; 20: 352–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Finley PR, Sommer BR, Corbitt JL, et al. Risperidone: clinical outcome predictors and cost-effectiveness in a naturalistic setting. Psychopharmacol Bull 1998; 34: 75–81PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nightengale BS, Crumly JM, Liao J, et al. Economic outcomes of antipsychotic agents in a Medicaid population: traditional agents vs risperidone. Psychopharmacol Bull 1998; 34: 373–82PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schiller MJ, Shumway M, Hargreaves WA. Treatment costs and patient outcomes with use of risperidone in a public mental health setting. Psychiatr Serv 1999; 50: 228–32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gianfrancesco F, Mahmoud R, Wang R, et al. Use of health care services by patients treated with risperidone vs conventional antipsychotic agents. Pharmacoeconomics 2002; 20 (6): 413–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lindström E, Eriksson B, Hellgren A, et al. Efficacy and safety of risperidone in the long-term treatment of patients with schizophrenia. Clin Ther 1995; 17: 402–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Addington DE, Jones B, Bloom D, et al. Reduction of hospital days in chronic schizophrenic patients treated with risperidone: a retrospective study. Clin Ther 1993; 15: 917–26PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hargreaves WA, Shumway M. Pharmacoeconomics of antipsychotic drug therapy. J Clin Psychiatry 1996; 57 Suppl. 9: 66–76PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Borison RL. Changing antipsychotic medication: guidelines on the transition to treatment with risperidone. Clin Ther 1996; 18: 592–607PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    International classification of diseases, ninth revision (ICD-9). Hyattsville (MD): US Department of Health and Human Services, 2001Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wirshing DA, Spellberg BJ, Erhart SM, et al. Novel antipsychotics and the new onset diabetes. Biol Psychiatry 1998; 44: 778–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Srnyak MJ, Leslie DL, Alarcon RD, et al. Association of diabetes mellitus with use of atypical neuroleptics in the treatment of schizophrenia. Am J Pyschiatry 2002; 159: 561–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gianfrancesco F, Grogg A, Mahmoud R, et al. Association of new-onset diabetes and antipyschotics: findings from a large health plan database. Poster presentaion at the 2001 annual meeting of the Annual Psychiatric Association; New Orleans (LA); 2001 May 5–10Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Duan N, Manning Jr WG, Morris CN, et al. A comparison of alternative models for the demand for medical care. J Bus Econ Stat 1983; 1: 115–26Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Duan N, Manning Jr WG, Morris CN, et al. Choosing between the sample-selection model and the multi-part model. J Bus Econ Stat 1984; 2: 283–9Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zhou XH, Melfi CA, Hui SL. Methods for comparison of cost data. Ann Intern Med 1997; 127: 752–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Desgagné A, Castilloux A-M, Angers J-F, et al. The use of the bootstrap statistical method for the pharmacoeconomic cost analysisof skewed data. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13 (5): 487–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank Gianfrancesco
    • 1
  • Ruey-Hua Wang
    • 1
  • Ramy Mahmoud
    • 2
  • Richard White
    • 3
  1. 1.HECON Associates, IncMontgomery VillageUSA
  2. 2.Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P.TitusvilleUSA
  3. 3.AstrazenecaWilmingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations