, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 223–232 | Cite as

Cost Analysis of Paroxetine versus Imipramine in Major Depression

  • Judith D. Bentkover
  • John P. Feighner
Original Research Article


A simulation decision analytical model was used to compare the annual direct medical costs of treating patients with major depression using the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) paroxetine or the tricyclic antidepressant (TeA) imipramine. Medical treatment patterns were determined from focus groups of general and family practitioners and psychiatrists in Boston, Dallas and Chicago, US. Direct medical costs included the wholesale drug acquisition costs (based on a 6-month course of drug therapy), psychiatrist and/or general practitioner visits, hospital outpatient visits, hospitalisation and electroconvulsive therapy. Acute phase treatment failure rates were derived from an intention-to-treat analysis of a previously published trial of paroxetine. imipramine and placebo in patients with major depression. Maintenance phase relapse rates were obtained from a 12-month trial of paroxetine, supplemented from the medical literature. The relapse rates for the final 6 months of the year were obtained from medical literature and expert opinion. Direct medical costs were estimated from a health insurance claims database.

The estimated total direct medical cost per patient was slightly lower using paroxeline ($US2348) than generic imipramine ($US2448) as first-line therapy. This result was sensitive to short term dropout rates but robust to changes in other major parameters, including hospitalisation costs and relapse rates. The financial benefit of paroxetine. despite its 15-fold higher acquisition cost compared with imipramine. is attributable to a higher rate of completion of the initial course of therapy and consequent reduced hospitalisation rates.


Major Depression Relapse Rate Paroxetine Imipramine Acquisition Cost 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Regier DA, Body JH, Burket JD, et al. One-month prevalence of mental disorders in the United States: based on five epidemiologic catchment area sites. Arch Gen Psychiatr 1988; 45: 977–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    National Institute of Mental Health/National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference. Am J Psychiatr 1985; 142: 469–76Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Stoudemire A, Frank R, Hedemark N, et al. The economic burden of depression. Gen Hosp Psychiatr 1986; 8: 387–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rice DP. Conceptual and estimation issues related to cost of illness studies. 2nd International Workshop on Costs and Assessment in Psychiatry: The Costs of Affective Disorders; 1992 Oct 26-28: Venice (Italy)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Greenberg PE, Stiglin LE, Finkelstein SN. The economic burden of depression in 1990. J Clin Psychiatr 1993; 54: 405–18Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Drummond MF, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications, 1987Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Freund DA, Dittus RS. Principles of pharmacoeconomic analysis of drug therapy. PharmacoEconomics 1992; 1: 20–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FFH. Indirect costs in economic studies: confronting the confusion. PharmacoEconomics 1993; 4: 446–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McCombs JS, Nichol MB, Stimmel GL, et al. The cost of antidepressant drug therapy failure: a study of antidepressant use patterns in a Medicaid population. J Clin Psychiatr 1990: 51(6 Suppl): 60–9Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Haynes RB, Taylor DN, Sackett DL, editors. Compliance in healthcare. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Tugwell P. Clinical epidemiology: a basic science for clinical medicine. Boston: Little, Brown & Company, 1985Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dechant KL, Clissold SP. Paroxetine: a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic potential in depressive illness. Drugs 1991; 41: 225–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dunbar GC, Stoker MJ. Overview of world-wide data base for safely and efficacy of paroxetine [abstract]. 5th World Congress of Biopsychiatry; 1991: FlorenceGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Milne RJ, Goa K. Citalopram: a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic potential in depressive illness. Drugs 1991; 41(3): 450–77PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tollefson GD. Antidepressant treatment and side effect considerations. J Clin Psychiatr 1991; 52Suppl 2: S4–13Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stewart A. Antidepressant pharmacotherapy: cost comparison of SSRIs and TCAs. Br J Med Econ 1994; 7: 67–79Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dunbar GC, Cohn JB, Fabre LF, et al. A comparison of paroxetine, imipramine and placebo in depressed outpatients. Br J Psychiatr 1991; 159: 394–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kupfer DJ. Long-term treatment of depression. J Clin Psychiatr 1991; 52(5): 28–34Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, 9th rev. ed., clinical modification). 4th ed. US Department of Health and Human Services: 1991 Oct. Publication No (PHS) 81–1260Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    DSM-III-R (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd rev. ed.) Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 1987Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Frank E, Kupfer DJ, Perel JM, et al. Three-year outcome for maintenance therapies in recurrent depression. Arch Gen Psychiatr 1990; 47: 1093–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Van Korff M, Ormel J, Katon W, et al. Disability and depression among high utilizers of healthcare. Arch Gen Psychiatr 1992; 49: 91–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Judith D. Bentkover
    • 1
  • John P. Feighner
    • 2
  1. 1.Judith O. Benlkover and AssociatesChestnut HillUSA
  2. 2.Feighner Research InstituteSan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations