Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing the value of antipsychotics for treating schizophrenia

The importance of evaluating and interpreting the clinical significance of individual service costs

  • Leading Article
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Schizophrenia is a serious and complex disorder, with treatment requiring a large number and wide range of health and social service resources. This paper addresses one challenge for assessing the direct costs of antipsychotic treatments — that of interpreting both cost and effectiveness implications of specific components of service use.

Information collected on direct component costs has frequently been analysed and reported only in total. Results of several published studies provide evidence that the total direct medical costs associated with atypical antipsychotics appear to be at least equivalent to, and in some cases lower than, those associated with conventional agents. An important implication of this cost-equivalency finding is that treatment involving higher medication costs have led to offsets in certain medical service costs.

Results from several studies demonstrate a shift of cost components, primarily from more expensive inpatient to less expensive outpatient care. Although the common inpatient versus outpatient dichotomy is useful, the complexities of schizophrenia and the heterogeneity of outpatient service provision are likely to warrant greater specificity.

Published schizophrenia treatment guidelines can assist researchers to more fully understand and meaningfully interpret the possible relationship of antipsychotic effectiveness to the use of particular outpatient services. Because the disease requires comprehensive and continuous care, outpatient treatment costs may be better conceptualised as baseline or expectable costs necessary in the maintenance phase of treatment. Lack of expectable costs may represent poor patient outcomes and increased intangible costs. In contrast, reductions in acute outpatient service costs may provide important markers of treatment effectiveness. A small number of studies have examined the use of crisis services, but additional work is needed to differentiate treatments vis-à-vis the need for intensive (acute) interventions.

The assessment and clinical interpretation of individual cost components may offer an important opportunity to build upon initial results focusing on total costs and tailor analyses to the complexities of the disorder and the treatment process. Research able to incorporate clinical acumen into cost analyses will enhance the ability of healthcare policy makers to make informed decisions regarding the value of different antipsychotic medications for the treatment of schizophrenia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Garattini L, Rossi C, Teddiosi F, et al. Direct costs of schizophrenia in Italian Community Psychiatric Services. Pharamacoeconomics 2001; 19 (12): 1217–25

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Rouillon F, Toumi M, Dansette GY, et al. Some aspects of the cost of schizophrenia in France. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 11 (6): 578–94

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Rice DP, Miller LS. 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 schizophrenia. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  4. Terkelsen KG, Menikoff A. Measuring the costs of schizophrenia: implications for the post-institutional era in the US. Pharmacoeconomics 1995; 8 (3): 199–222

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Tunis SL, Croghan TW, Heilman DK, et al. Reliability, validity, and application of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) in schizophrenic patients treated with olanzapine versus haloperidol. Med Care 1999; 37 (7): 678–91

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Russo J, Trujillo CA, Wingerson D, et al. The MOS 36-item short form health survey: reliability, validity, and preliminary findings in schizophrenic outpatients. Med Care 1998; 36 (5): 752–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Jeste DV, Gladsjo JA, Lindamer LA, et al. Medical comorbidity in schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull 1996; 22 (3): 413–30

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Josiassen RC, Schindler B. Medical comorbidity and schizophrenia: editors’ introduction. Schizophr Bull 1996; 22 (3): 411–2

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Goldman L. Medical illness in patients with schizophrenia. J Clin Psychiatry 1999; 60 Suppl. 21: 10–5

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Harris EC, Barraclough B. Excess mortality of mental disorder. Br J Psychiatry 1998; 173: 11–53

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Harris A. Physical disease and schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull 1988; 14: 31–42

    Google Scholar 

  12. Salyer M, Mueser K. Social functioning, psychopathology, and medication side effects in relation to substance use and abuse in schizophrenia. Schizophr Res 2001; 48: 109–23

    Google Scholar 

  13. Swofford C, Scheller-Gilkey G, Miller A, et al. Double jeopardy: schizophrenia and substance abuse. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 2000; 26: 343–53

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Cuffel B, Chase P. Remission and relapse of substance use disorders in schizophrenia: results from a one-year prospective study. J Nerv Ment Dis 1994; 182: 342–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Siris SG. Suicide and schizophrenia. J Psychopharmacol 2001; 15 (2): 127–35

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Souetre E. Economic assessment of neuroleptic strategies in schizophrenia. Int Acad Biomed Drug Res 1995; 10: 193–9

    Google Scholar 

  17. Knapp M, Kavanagh S. Economic outcomes and costs in the treatment of schizophrenia. Clin Ther 1997; 19 (1): 128–38

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Wyatt R, Clark K. Calculating the cost of schizophrenia. Psychiatr Ann 1987; 17: 586–91

    Google Scholar 

  19. Clark G, Kernick H, Kinney R, et al. Psychiatric hospitalizations, arrests, emergency room visits, and homelessness of clients with serious and persistent mental illness: findings from a randomized trial of two ACT programs vs. usual care. Ment Health Serv Res 2000; 2 (3): 155–64

    Google Scholar 

  20. Davies LM, Drummond MF. Economics and schizophrenia: the real cost. Br J Psychiatry Suppl 1994; 25: 18–21

    Google Scholar 

  21. American Psychiatric Association. Practice guidelines for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry 1997; 154 Suppl. 4: 1–63

    Google Scholar 

  22. McEvoy JP, Scheifler PL, Frances A. The expert consensus guideline series: treatment of schizophrenia 1999. J Clin Psychiatry 1999; 60 Suppl. 11: 3–80

    Google Scholar 

  23. Coley KC, Carter CS, DaPos SV, et al. Effectiveness of antipsychotic therapy in a naturalistic setting: a comparison between risperidone, perphenazine, and haloperidol. J Clin Psychiatry 1999; 60 (12): 850–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Schooler NR, Keith SJ, Severe JB, et al. Relapse and rehospitalization during maintenance treatment of schizophrenia: the effects of dose reduction and family treatment. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1997; 54 (5): 453–63

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Tandon R. Safety and tolerability: how do newer generation “atypical” antipsychotics compare? Psychiatr Q 2002; 73 (4): 297–311

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Casey DE. The relationship of pharmacology to side effects. J Clin Psychiatry 1997; 58 Suppl. 10: 55–62

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Tollefson GD, Beasley Jr CM, Tran PV, et al. Olanzapine versus haloperidol in the treatment of schizophrenia and schizoaffective and schizophreniform disorders: results of an international collaborative trial. Am J Psychiatry 1997; 154 (4): 457–65

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Campbell M, Young PI, Bateman DN, et al. The use of atypical antipsychotics in the management of schizophrenia. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1999; 47 (1): 13–22

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Feltus M, Gardner D. Second generation antipsychotics for schizophrenia. Can J Clin Psychiatry 1999; 6: 187–95

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Citrome L, Volavka J. Atypical antipsychotics: revolutionary or incremental advance? Exp Rev Neurother 2002; 2 (1): 69–88

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Glazer WM, Johnstone B. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of antipsychotic therapy for schizophrenia. J Clin Psychiatry 1997; 58 Suppl. 10: 50–4

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Revicki DA, Genduso LA, Hamilton SH, et al. Olanzapine versus haloperidol in the treatment of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders: quality of life and clinical outcomes of a randomized clinical trial. Qual Life Res 1999; 8: 417–26

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Meyer P, Bond G, Tunis S, et al. Comparison between the effects of atypical and traditional antipsychotics on work status for clients in a psychiatric rehabilitation program. J Clin Psychiatry 2002; 63 (2): 108–16

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Tunis SL, Johnstone BM, Gibson PJ, et al. Changes in perceived health and functioning as a cost-effectiveness measure for olanzapine versus haloperidol treatment of schizophrenia. J Clin Psychiatry 1999; 60 Suppl. 19: 38–45

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Meltzer H, Thompson P, Lee M, et al. Neuropsychologic deficits in schizophrenia: relation to social function and effect of antipsychotic drug treatment. Neuropsychopharmacology 1996; 14 (3S): 27S–33S

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Hamilton SH, Edgell ET, Revicki DA, et al. Functional outcomes in schizophrenia: a comparison of olanzapine and haloperidol in a European sample. Int Clin Psychopharmacol 2000; 15 (5): 245–55

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Mahmoud R, Engelhart L, Ollendorf D, et al. The Risperidone Outcomes Study of Effectiveness (ROSE): a model for evaluating treatment strategies in typical psychiatric practice. J Clin Psychiatry 1999; 60 Suppl. 3: 42–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Jann M, Cohen L. Economic considerations and formulary management of oral antipsychotics. Dis Manag Health Outcomes 1998; 3 (3): 115–29

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lewis M, McCrone P, Frangou S. Service use and costs of treating schizophrenia with atypical antipsychotics. J Clin Psychiatry 2001; 62 (10): 749–56

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Lehman A. Evaluating outcomes of treatments for persons with psychotic disorders. J Clin Psychiatry 1996; 57: S61–7

    Google Scholar 

  41. Docherty JP. Cost of treating mental illness from a managed care perspective. J Clin Psychiatry 1999; 3: 49–52

    Google Scholar 

  42. Nightengale B, Crumly J, Liao J, et al. Economic outcomes of antipsychotic agents in a Medicaid population: traditional agents vs risperidone. Psychopharmacol Bull 1998; 34 (3): 373–82

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Revicki DA. Pharmacoeconomic studies of atypical antipsychotic drugs for the treatment of schizophrenia. Schizophr Res 1999; 35 Suppl.: S101–9

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Karki S, Bellnier T, Patil K, et al. Cost-effectiveness of atypical antipsychotics in severely and persistently mentally ill patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. Drug Benefit Trends 2001; 13 (2): 7BH–15BH

    Google Scholar 

  45. Ginsberg G, Shani S, Lev B. Cost-benefit analysis of risperidone and clozapine in the treatment of schizophrenia in Israel. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13 (2): 231–41

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Edgell ET, Andersen SW, Johnstone BM, et al. Olanzapine versus risperidone: a prospective comparison of clinical and economic outcomes in schizophrenia. Pharmacoeconomics 2000; 18 (6): 567–79

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Tunis S, Johnstone B, Kinon B, et al. Designing naturalistic prospective studies of economic and effectiveness outcomes associated with novel antipsychotic therapies. Value Health 2000; 3 (3): 232–42

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Rascati KL, Johnsrud MT, Crismon ML, et al. Olanzapine versus risperidone in the treatment of schizophrenia: a comparison of costs among Texas Medicaid patients. Pharmacoeconomics 2003; 21 (10): 683–97

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Zhao Z. A retrospective economic evaluation of olanzapine versus risperidone in the treatment of schizophrenia. Manag Care Interface 2002; 15 (2): 75–81

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Karki SD. Cost-effectiveness of atypical antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia. Drug Benefit Trends 2001; 13 Suppl. D: 16–28

    Google Scholar 

  51. Kernick DP. The impact of health economics on healthcare delivery: a primary care perspective. Pharmacoeconomics 2000; 18 (4): 311–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Gianfrancesco F, Wang RH, Mahmoud R, et al. Methods for claims-based pharmacoeconomic studies in psychosis. Pharmacoeconomics 2002; 20 (8): 499–511

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Rosenheck R, Cramer J, Allan E, et al. Cost-effectiveness of clozapine in patients with high and low levels of hospital use: Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group on Clozapine in Refractory Schizophrenia. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1999; 56 (6): 565–72

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Revicki D, Luce B, Weschler J, et al. Cost effectiveness of clozapine for treatment-resistent schizophrenic patients. Hosp Community Psychiatry 1990; 41: 850–4

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Rosenheck R, Cramer J, Xu W, et al. A comparison of clozapine and haloperidol in hospitalized patients with refractory schizophrenia: Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group on Clozapine in Refractory Schizophrenia. N Engl J Med 1997; 337 (12): 809–15

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Hamilton S, Revicki D, Edgell E, et al. Clinical and economic outcomes of olanzapine compared with haloperidol for schizophrenia: results from a randomised clinical trial. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 15 (5): 469–80

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Essock SM, Hargreaves WA, Covell NH, et al. Clozapine’s effectiveness for patients in state hospitals: results from a randomized trial. Psychopharmacol Bull 1996; 32 (4): 683–97

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Obenchain RL, Johnstone BM. Mixed model imputation of cost data for early discontinuers from a randomized clinical trial. Drug Inf J 1999; 33: 191–209

    Google Scholar 

  59. Sacristan JA, Gomez JC, Martin J, et al. Pharmacoeconomic assessment of olanzapine in the treatment of refractory schizophrenia based on a pilot clinical study. Clin Drug Invest 1998 Jan; 15: 29–35

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Cook PE, Goldberg JO, Van Lieshout RJ. Benefits of switching from typical to atypical antipsychotic medications: a longitudinal study in a community-based setting. Can J Psychiatry 2002; 47 (9): 870–4

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Gianfrancesco F, Durkin MB, Mahmoud R, et al. Use of healthcare services by patients treated with risperidone versus conventional antipsychotic agents. Pharmacoeconomics 2002; 20 (6): 413–27

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Almond S, O’Donnell O. Cost analysis of the treatment of schizophrenia in the UK: a comparison of olanzapine and haloperidol. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13: 575–88

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Mauskopf J, David K, Grainger D, et al. Annual health outcomes and treatment costs for schizophrenia populations. J Clin Psychiatry 1999; 60 Suppl. 19: 14–22

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. 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 (1): 59–67

    Google Scholar 

  65. Viale G, Mechling L, Maislin G, et al. Impact of risperidone on the use of mental health care resources. Psychiatr Serv 1997; 48 (9): 1153–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Lehman AF, Steinwachs DM. Patterns of usual care for schizophrenia: initial results from the Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) Client Survey. Schizophr Bull 1998; 24 (1): 11–20

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Lehman AF, Steinwachs DM. Translating research into practice: the Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) treatment recommendations. Schizophr Bull 1998; 24 (1): 1–10

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Weiden PJ, Olfson M. Cost of relapse in schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull 1995; 21 (3): 419–29

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Morris S, McGuire A, Hogan T. The cost-effectiveness of clozapine: a survey of the literature. Clin Drug Invest 1998; 15 (2): 137–52

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Lyu R, Jeffrey M, McCombs J, et al. Use of conventional antipsychotics and the cost of treating schizophrenia. Health Care Financ Rev 2001 Winter; 23 (2): 83–99

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Ghaemi SN, Ziegler DM, Peachey TJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of clozapine therapy for severe psychosis. Psychiatr Serv 1998; 49 (6): 829–31

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Jonsson D, Walinder J. Cost-effectiveness of clozapine treatment in therapy-refractory schizophrenia. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1995; 92 (3): 199–201

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Del Paggio D, Finley PR, Cavano JM. Clinical and economic outcomes associated with olanzapine for the treatment of psychotic symptoms in a county mental health population. Clin Ther 2002; 24 (5): 803–17

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. 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 (2): 228–32

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Brown S. Excess mortality in schizophrenia: a meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry 1997; 171: 502–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Anis A, Rahman T, Schechter M. Using pharmacoeconomic analysis to make drug insurance coverage decisions. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13: 119–26

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Hill SR, Mitchell AS, Henry DA. Problems with the interpretation of pharmacoeconomic analyses: a review of submissions to the Australian pharmaceutical benefits scheme. JAMA 2000 Apr 26; 283 (16): 2116–21

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, in that the authors are full time employees. Portions of the paper are based upon a poster presentation made at the 7th Annual Meeting of the International Society of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR), in Arlington, Virginia, USA, May 19–22, 2002.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. US Medical Division, Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA

    Sandra L. Tunis, Haya Ascher-Svanum, Michael Stensland & Bruce J. Kinon

Authors
  1. Sandra L. Tunis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Haya Ascher-Svanum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael Stensland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bruce J. Kinon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tunis, S.L., Ascher-Svanum, H., Stensland, M. et al. Assessing the value of antipsychotics for treating schizophrenia. Pharmacoeconomic 22, 1–8 (2004). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200422010-00001

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200422010-00001

Keywords

Search

Navigation