Il trattamento dei disturbi psicotici con olanzapina, risperidone e neurolettici tipici: una valutazione comparativa di costo/efficacia in una realtà psichiatrica locale
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7175/fe.v6i3.832Keywords:
Olanzapine, Risperidone, Typical neuroleptics, Pharmacoeconomic analysisAbstract
BACKGROUND: Several clinical trials demonstrated that atypical antipsychotics are more effective but also more expensive (as drug cost) compared with the typical neuroleptics by treating psychotic disorders. The present study aimed to evaluate this result using an observational approach which better reflects the real clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical effectiveness (including work and social functioning) and overall direct costs in a group of patients affected by psychotic disorders (schizophrenia and bipolar) and treated with typical and atypical (olanzapine and risperidone) antipsychotics. METHODS: With a multicentre observational design - two years long - 89 patients (in charge by Psychiatric Centers of Regione Campania - Italy) were assessed using CGI (Clinical Global Impression) and GAF (Global Assessment of Functioning) scales. Moreover economic data were collected with reference to pharmacological and non-pharmacological (hospitalization, medical/nurse visits, etc.) resources consumption. The pharmacoeconomic analysis were conducted choosing the perspective of the local Psychiatric Services for costs attribution. RESULTS: Considering the treatment outcomes, the use of the atypical drugs provided better performances with reference to the patients quality of life. The results in terms of work and social functioning indicated an advantage in the olanzapine group of patients. Overall direct costs of treatment (drugs and healthcare resources) didn’t generate significant differences among the groups of therapy despite the pharmacological cost evidentiated an economic advantage (p<0,05) in the typical group due to the cheaper cost of these drugs. The use of olanzapine was associated to a lower number of hospitalizations and showed a general reduction (- 16%) of total treatment costs between 1st and 2nd year of observation. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of side effects, the improvement in work and social functioning, associated to a more efficient use of total healthcare resources seems to be at the basis of the better pharmacoeconomic profile for olanzapine compared with the other antipsychotic therapies.Downloads
Published
2005-09-15
How to Cite
Filippelli, E., Biricolti, G., Scarano, C., Russo, F., & Luciano, L. (2005). Il trattamento dei disturbi psicotici con olanzapina, risperidone e neurolettici tipici: una valutazione comparativa di costo/efficacia in una realtà psichiatrica locale. Farmeconomia. Health Economics and Therapeutic Pathways, 6(3), 161–168. https://doi.org/10.7175/fe.v6i3.832
Issue
Section
Original research
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal. The Publication Agreement can be downloaded here, and should be signed by the Authors and sent to the Publisher when the article has been accepted for publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access).
- Authors are permitted to post their work online after publication (the article must link to publisher version, in html format)