PharmacoEconomics

, Volume 29, Issue 2, pp 157–170

Impact of Treatment Success on Health Service Use and Cost in Depression

Longitudinal Database Analysis
  • Sarah Byford
  • Barbara Barrett
  • Nicolas Despiégel
  • Alan Wade
Original Research Article Impact of Treatment Success on Cost in Depression

Abstract

Background: Research has consistently demonstrated a relationship between depression and increased levels of health service use over the short term. However, much less is known about how this relationship is influenced by the success, or otherwise, of depression management strategies, and the economic impact over the longer term.

Objective: To investigate the economic impact of non-remission on health service use and costs over 12 months from the index episode in patients with depression.

Methods: A naturalistic, longitudinal study was carried out using data from a large primary care UK general practice research database between 2001 and 2006. The records of 88935 patients aged ≥18 years, diagnosed with depression and in receipt of at least two antidepressant prescriptions (for amitriptyline, citalopram, escitalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline or venlafaxine) in the first 3 months after the index prescription were included. The main outcome measures were health service use and cost over the 12-month study period, by remission status, where remission is defined as patients not using antidepressants for at least 6 months after antidepressant treatment has ended.

Results: Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were similar for participants classified as in remission and those not in remission. Over 12 months from the index prescription, patients classified as non-remitters spent longer, on average, than patients classified as remitters on concomitant psychotropic medication (204 days vs 93 days, respectively), and had more contact with primary care services (17 vs 13 GP visits), secondary care psychiatrists and other specialists (47% vs 40%). Days in hospital, accident and emergency attendances and psychological therapy contacts did not differ between the groups. Total 12-month costs per participant were significantly lower for remitters (mean £656 vs £937; mean difference £317; p < 0.0001). Total costs fell over time for both groups, but at a faster rate for those in remission, and for those who remitted earlier after the index prescription than for those who remitted later.

Conclusions: Successful cessation of antidepressant medication treatment in adults with depression can result in significant cost savings to the health service.

References

  1. 1.
    Simon G, Ormel J, Von Korff M, et al. Health care costs associated with depressive and anxiety disorders in primary care. Am J Psychiatry 1995; 152 (3): 352–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Katon WJ. Clinical and health services relationships between major depression, depressive symptoms, and general medical illness. Biol Psychiatry 2003; 54 (3): 216–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Simon GE, Khandker RK, Ichikawa L, et al. Recovery from depression predicts lower health services costs. J Clin Psychiatry 2006; 67 (8): 1226–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sobocki P, Ekman M, Agren H, et al. The mission is remission: health economic consequences of achieving full remission with antidepressant treatment for depression. Int J Clin Pract 2006; 60 (7): 791–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    van Schaik DJF, Klijn AFJ, van Hout HPJ, et al. Patients’ preferences in the treatment of depressive disorder in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2004; 26: 184–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cooper C, Bebbington P, King M, et al. Why people do not take their psychotropic drugs as prescribed: results from the 2000 National Psychiatric Morbidity Survey. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2007; 116: 47–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moore M, Yuen HM, Dunn N, et al. Explaining the rise in antidepressant prescribing: a descriptive study using the general practice research database. BMJ 2009; 339: b3999CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    The General Practice Research Database (GPRD) [online]. Available from URL: http://www.gprd.com [Accessed 2008 Sep 5]
  9. 9.
    Montgomery SA, Asberg M. A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. Br J Psychiatry 1979; 134: 382–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hawley CJ, Gale TM, Sivakumaran T. Defining remission by cut off score on the MADRS: selecting the optimal value. J Affective Disord 2002; 72 (2): 177–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sicras-Mainar A, Blanca-Tamayo M, Navarro-Artieda R, et al. Clinical validity of remission in patients with major depression in population databases [abstract no. PMH50]. Value Health 2009; 12 (7): A360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Curtis L, Netten A. Unit costs of health and social care 2006. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit, 2006Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Department of Health. NHS reference costs 2006. London: Department of Health, 2006Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    British Medical Association, Royal Pharmaceutical Society. British national formulary. London: British Medical Association, 2006Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hospital Episode Statistics (HESonline™) [online]. Available from URL: http://www.HESonline.nhs.uk [Accessed 2008 Sep 5]
  16. 16.
    WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology. ATC/DDD index 2010 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.whocc.no/atcddd [Accessed 2008 Sep 5]Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Martinez C, Rietbrock S, Wise L, et al. Antidepressant treatment and the risk of fatal and non-fatal self harm in first episode depression: nested case-control study. BMJ 2005; 330: 389–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McCullagh P, Nelder J. Generalized linear models. London: Chapman and Hall, 1989Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Depression: management of depression in primary and secondary care. Clinical guideline 23. London: NICE, 2004Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Paykel ES, Priest RG. Recognition and management of depression in general practice: consensus statement. BMJ 1992; 305: 1198–202PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Glick HA, Briggs AH, Polsky D. Quantifying stochastic uncertainty and presenting results of cost-effectiveness analyses. Exp Rev Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res 2001; 1 (1): 25–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rodin G, Voshart K. Depression in the medically ill: an overview. Am J Psychiatry 1986; 143: 696–705PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thomas CM, Morris S. Cost of depression among adults in England in 2000. Br J Psychiatry 2003; 183: 514–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kendrick T, Chatwin J, Dowrick C, et al. Randomised controlled trial to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors plus supportive care, versus supportive care alone, for mild to moderate depression with somatic symptoms in primary care: the THREAD (THREshold for AntiDepressant response) study. Health Technol Assess 2009 Apr; 13 (22): iii-iv, ix-xi, 1–159Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Byford S, Leese M, Knapp M, et al. Comparison of alternative methods of collection of service use data for the economic evaluation of health care interventions. Health Econ 2007; 16: 531–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sarah Byford
    • 1
  • Barbara Barrett
    • 1
  • Nicolas Despiégel
    • 2
  • Alan Wade
    • 3
  1. 1.King’s College London, Centre for the Economics of Mental Health, P024Institute of PsychiatryLondonUK
  2. 2.Lundbeck SASParisFrance
  3. 3.CPS Clinical Research CentreGlasgowUK

Personalised recommendations