Patient Characteristics Associated With Use of Lurasidone Versus Other Atypical Antipsychotics in Patients With Bipolar Disorder: Analysis From a Claims Database in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To compare patient characteristics, medical comorbidities, health care utilization, and health care costs among patients with bipolar disorder who initiated lurasidone versus other atypical antipsychotics in usual clinical practice. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of administrative claims data was conducted using the US Optum Research Database (December 30, 2012, through February 27, 2014). Adult, commercially insured patients with bipolar disorder with an atypical antipsychotic prescription between June 28, 2013, and November 30, 2013, were included. The lurasidone cohort first included any patients with a lurasidone prescription; remaining patients were assigned to their first atypical antipsychotic (aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, ziprasidone). Preindex patient characteristics comparisons to lurasidone were conducted with t tests (continuous variables) and χ² or Fisher exact tests (categorical variables). RESULTS: A total of 3,329 patients were included in this database analysis. A higher percentage of the lurasidone cohort (31.1%) had bipolar depression compared with the other cohorts (23.5%-28.0%). The lurasidone cohort had a statistically significantly higher percentage of patients with prior diabetes mellitus (13.3%) and lipid metabolism disorders (23.2%) than did the quetiapine cohort (8.4% and 16.3%, P < .01). In addition, the lurasidone cohort had significantly more prior antipsychotic polypharmacy (23.0% vs 6.7%-12.9%, P < .01) and atypical antipsychotic use (55.6% vs 11.8%-26.3%, P < .01) than other cohorts. The lurasidone cohort had a statistically significantly higher mean number of prior all-cause and mental health office visits (P < .001) and higher mean prior pharmacy costs than most cohorts (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Lurasidone-treated patients with bipolar disorder tended to have a more complex clinical profile, comorbidities, and prior treatment history compared to patients initiated with other atypical antipsychotics in this claims database study. This pattern of treatment may have reflected the overall clinical profile of lurasidone, the role perceived for lurasidone in the therapeutic armamentarium by practitioners, and the recent introduction of lurasidone into clinical practice during the study period.

Major depressive disorder with subthreshold hypomanic (mixed) features: A real-world assessment of treatment patterns and economic burden.

BACKGROUND: To compare outcomes for individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) with or without subthreshold hypomania (mixed features) in naturalistic settings. METHODS: Using the Optum Research Database (1/1/2009─10/31/2014), a retrospective analysis of individuals newly diagnosed with MDD was conducted. Continuous enrollment for 12-months before and after the initial MDD diagnosis was required. MDD with subthreshold hypomania (mixed features) (MDD-MF) was defined based on ≥1 hypomania diagnosis within 30 days after an MDD diagnosis during the one-year follow-up period, in the absence of bipolar I diagnoses. Psychiatric medication use, healthcare utilization, and costs during the one-year follow-up period were compared using multivariate logistic and gamma regressions, controlling for baseline differences. RESULTS: Of 130,626 MDD individuals, 652 (0.5%) met the operational definition of MDD-MF. Compared to the MDD-only group, the MDD-MF group had more suicidality (2.0% vs. 0.5%), anxiety disorders (46.8% vs. 34.0%), and substance use disorders (15.5% vs. 6.1%, all P<0.001). More individuals with MDD-MF were treated with antidepressants (83.6% vs. 71.6%), mood stabilizers (50.5% vs. 2.7%), atypical antipsychotics (39.0% vs. 5.5%), and polypharmacy with multiple drug classes (72.1% vs. 22.7%, all P<0.001). Individuals with MDD-MF had higher hospitalizations rates (24.2% vs. 10.5%) and total healthcare costs (mean: $15,660 vs. $10,744, all P<0.001). LIMITATIONS: The commercial claims data used were not collected for research purposes and may over- or under-represent certain populations. No specific claims-based diagnostic code for MDD with mixed features exists. CONCLUSIONS: Greater use of mood stabilizers, atypical antipsychotics, polypharmacy, and healthcare resources provides evidence of the complexity and severity of MDD-MF. Identifying optimal treatment regimens for this population represents a major unmet medical need.

Smoking Cessation Intervention for Severe Mental Ill Health Trial (SCIMITAR+): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Smoking is highly prevalent among people who have experience of severe mental ill health, contributing to their poor physical health. Despite the 'culture' of smoking in mental health services, people with severe mental ill health often express a desire to quit smoking; however, the services currently available to aid quitting are those which are widely available to the general population and may not be suitable or effective for people with severe mental ill health. The aim of this study is to explore the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a bespoke smoking-cessation intervention specifically targeted at people with severe mental ill health. METHODS/DESIGN: SCIMITAR+ is a multicentre, pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group, individually randomised controlled trial. We aim to recruit 400 participants aged 18 years and above with a documented diagnosis of bipolar disorder, schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who smoke. Potentially eligible participants identified in primary or secondary care will be screened, and baseline data collected. Eligible, consenting participants will be randomly allocated to one of two groups. In the intervention arm, the participant will be assigned a mental health professional trained to deliver smoking-cessation interventions who will work with the participant and participant's GP or mental health specialist to provide an individually tailored smoking-cessation service. The comparator arm will be usual care - following current NICE guidelines for smoking cessation, in line with general guidance that is offered to all smokers, with no specific adaptation or enhancement in relation to severe mental ill health. The primary outcome will be self-reported smoking cessation at 12 months verified by expired carbon monoxide (CO) measurement. Secondary outcome measures include Body Mass Index at 12 months, the Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence, Motivation to Quit questionnaire, SF-12, PHQ-9, GAD-7, EQ-5D-5 L, and health service utilisation at 6 and 12 months. The economic evaluation at 12 months will be conducted in the form of an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis. DISCUSSION: SCIMITAR+ trial is the largest trial to our knowledge to investigate the effectiveness of a bespoke smoking-cessation service for people with severe mental ill health. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number, ISRCTN72955454 . Registered on 16 January 2015.

Trastorno bipolar: garantías explícitas de salud e implicancias para enfermería / Bipolar disorder: explicit guarantees of health and implications for nursing

El trastorno afectivo bipolar es una enfermedad mental grave catalogada dentro de los trastornos del ánimo en el DSM 5. En el año 2013, se incorpora a la lista de los problemas de salud incluidos en las Garantías Explícitas de Salud GES, siendo un avance importante en relación a los principios que sustentan el sistema y la reforma de salud en Chile. Se realiza una reflexión crítica de la canasta GES a la luz de los componentes del sistema de Salud chileno, destacando el rol fundamental que tiene el enfermero/a psiquiátrico en la implementación de las prestaciones y recomendaciones. Finalmente, se destaca la importancia de la participación en la micro, meso y macrogestión para la profesión.

Bipolar disorder is a serious mental illness cataloged within of mood disorders in DMS 5. In 2013, it has incorporated to the list of health problems included in the explicit guarantees of health (GES), which it was an important advance in relation to the values that underpin reform and system of health in Chile. It is performed a critical reflection of the set of service GES and its relation with the components of the Chilean health system, highlighting the fundamental role that psychiatric nurses have in the implementation of the services and recomendations. Finally, it highlights the importance pf the participation in the micro, meso and macromanagement to the profession.

I Brazilian Registry of Heart Failure - Clinical Aspects, Care Quality and Hospitalization Outcomes / I Registro Brasileiro de Insuficiência Cardíaca – Aspectos Clínicos, Qualidade Assistencial e Desfechos Hospitalares

Background: Heart failure (HF) is one of the leading causes of hospitalization in adults in Brazil. However, most of the available data is limited to unicenter registries. The BREATHE registry is the first to include a large sample of hospitalized patients with decompensated HF from different regions in Brazil. Objective: Describe the clinical characteristics, treatment and prognosis of hospitalized patients admitted with acute HF. Methods: Observational registry study with longitudinal follow-up. The eligibility criteria included patients older than 18 years with a definitive diagnosis of HF, admitted to public or private hospitals. Assessed outcomes included the causes of decompensation, use of medications, care quality indicators, hemodynamic profile and intrahospital events. Results: A total of 1,263 patients (64±16 years, 60% women) were included from 51 centers from different regions in Brazil. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (70.8%), dyslipidemia (36.7%) and diabetes (34%). Around 40% of the patients had normal left ventricular systolic function and most were admitted with a wet-warm clinical-hemodynamic profile. Vasodilators and intravenous inotropes were used in less than 15% of the studied cohort. Care quality indicators based on hospital discharge recommendations were reached in less than 65% of the patients. Intrahospital mortality affected 12.6% of all patients included. Conclusion: The BREATHE study demonstrated the high intrahospital mortality of patients admitted with acute HF in Brazil, in addition to the low rate of prescription of drugs based on evidence. .

Fundamento: A insuficiência cardíaca (IC) é uma das principais causas de hospitalização em adultos no Brasil, no entanto a maioria dos dados disponíveis é limitada a registros unicêntricos. O registro BREATHE é o primeiro a incluir uma ampla amostra de pacientes hospitalizados com IC descompensada de diferentes regiões do Brasil. Objetivo: Descrever as características clínicas, tratamento e prognóstico intra-hospitalar de pacientes admitidos com IC aguda. Métodos: Estudo observacional tipo registro, com seguimento longitudinal. Os critérios de elegibilidade incluíram pacientes acima de 18 anos com diagnóstico definitivo de IC, admitidos em hospitais públicos ou privados. Os desfechos avaliados incluíram causas de descompensação, uso de medicações, indicadores de qualidade assistencial, perfil hemodinâmico e eventos intra-hospitalares. Resultados: O total de 1.263 pacientes (64 ± 16 anos, 60% mulheres) foi incluído a partir de 51 centros de diferentes regiões do Brasil. As comorbidades mais comuns foram hipertensão arterial (70,8%), dislipidemia (36,7%) e diabetes (34%). Em torno de 40% dos pacientes apresentavam função sistólica do ventrículo esquerdo normal e a maioria foi admitida com perfil clínico-hemodinâmico quente-úmido. Vasodilatadores e inotrópicos endovenosos foram administrados a menos de 15% da amostra estudada. Indicadores de qualidade assistencial baseados nas orientações de alta hospitalar foram atingidos em menos de 65% dos pacientes. A mortalidade intra-hospitalar afetou 12,6% do total dos pacientes incluídos. Conclusão: O estudo BREATHE demonstrou a alta mortalidade intra-hospitalar dos pacientes admitidos com IC aguda no Brasil, somada à baixa taxa de prescrição de medicamentos baseados em evidências. .

Cost-of-illness studies for bipolar disorder: systematic review of international studies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Bipolar disorder (BD) may result in a greater burden than all forms of cancer, Alzheimer's disease and epilepsy. Cost-of-illness (COI) studies provide useful information on the economic burden that BD imposes on a society. Furthermore, COI studies are pivotal sources of evidence used in economic evaluations. This study aims to give a general overview of COI studies for BD and to discuss methodological issues that might potentially influence results. This study also aims to provide recommendations to improve practice in this area, based on the review. METHODS: A search was performed to identify COI studies of BD. The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, HMIC and openSIGLE. The primary outcome of this review was the annual cost per BD patient. A narrative assessment of key methodological issues was also included. Based on these findings, recommendations for good practice were drafted. RESULTS: Fifty-four studies were included in this review. Because of the widespread methodological heterogeneity among included studies, no attempt has been made to pool results of different studies. Potential areas for methodological improvement were identified. These were: description of the disease and population, the approach to deal with comorbidities, reporting the rationale and impact for choosing different cost perspectives, and ways in which uncertainty is addressed. CONCLUSIONS: This review showed that numerous COI studies have been conducted for BD since 1995. However, these studies employed varying methods, which limit the comparability of findings. The recommendations provided by this review can be used by those conducting COI studies and those critiquing them, to increase the credibility and reporting of study results.

[Cost effectiveness of a health insurance based case management programme for patients with affective disorders]. / Kosteneffektivität eines krankenkassengestützten Case-Management-Programms für Patienten mit affektiven Störungen.

OBJECTIVE: Health economic evaluation of a health insurance based case management intervention for persons with mood to severe depressive disorders from payers' perspective. Intervention intended to raise utilization rates of outpatient health services. METHODS: Comparison of patients of one German health insurance company in two different regions/states. Cohort study consists of a control region offering treatment as usual. Patients in the experimental region were exposed to a case management programme guided by health insurance account manager who received trainings, quality circles and supervisions prior to intervention. Utilization rates of ambulatory psychiatrist and/or psychotherapist should be increased. Estimation of incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) was intended. RESULTS: Intervention yielded benefits for patients at comparable costs. A conservative estimation of the ICER was 44,16 euro. Maximum willingness to pay was 378,82 euro per year. Sensitivity analyses showed that this amount of maximum willingness to pay can be reduced to 34,34 euro per year or 2,86 euro per month due to cost degression effects. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention gains increasing cost effectiveness by the number of included patients and case managers. Cooperation between health insurances is suggested in order to minimize intervention cost and to maximize patient benefits. Results should be confirmed by individual longitudinal data (bottom-up approach) first.

[Optimized quality of care for affective disorders by health insurance-based case-management: a controlled cost-study]. / Krankenkassengestütztes Case-Management verbessert kostenneutral die Behandlungsqualität bei affektiven Störungen.

OBJECTIVE: Improvement of depression treatment by health insurance based case-management. Criteria of improvement were a higher treatment rate of patients suffering from affective disorders or depression by psychiatrists or psychotherapists than by general practitioners or family doctors and sickness fund payments. METHODS: Training of health insurance account managers (characteristics of depression, counselling and, case management techniques). Evaluation of outcomes during 12-months against a control group of account managers without training. RESULTS: Intervention group: 87.8 % patients with in average 13.5 contacts to psychiatrists or psychotherapists; control group: 82.6 % patients with 11.8 contacts. The difference was statistically significant. Health insurance payments did not differ. CONCLUSIONS: A higher treatment rate by psychiatrists and psychotherapists can be achieved by health insurance-based case-management without a cost-increase.

Cost effectiveness of adjunctive quetiapine fumarate extended-release tablets with mood stabilizers in the maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder.

BACKGROUND: Bipolar I disorder (BPD I) is a recurrent illness that affects 1% of the US population and constitutes a large economic burden. However, few studies have investigated the cost effectiveness of maintenance treatment options for BPD I. OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost effectiveness of maintenance treatment with quetiapine fumarate extended-release (XR) tablets in combination with mood stabilizers (lithium or divalproex) in comparison with the following treatments: placebo in combination with lithium or divalproex; no maintenance treatment; lithium monotherapy; lamotrigine monotherapy; olanzapine monotherapy; and aripiprazole monotherapy. METHODS: The analysis was conducted from the societal and payer perspectives in the US, using a Markov model. The model simulated a cohort of 1000 stabilized BPD I patients and estimated the quarterly risk in three health states: euthymia, mania and depression. Efficacy data were derived from two randomized, double-blind trials comparing quetiapine + lithium/divalproex with placebo + lithium/divalproex for up to 2 years, as well as other published literature. Resource data were extracted from published literature. Drug costs, hospitalizations and physician visits were among the direct costs. Indirect costs included absenteeism, and mortality rates included suicide. Benefits and costs were discounted at 3% and the price reference year was 2009. Endpoints included number of acute mood episodes, hospitalizations due to an acute mood event and costs per QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was conducted to evaluate uncertainty in the model inputs. RESULTS: Treatment with quetiapine XR + lithium/divalproex was associated with reductions in acute mania (46%), acute depression (41%) and related hospitalizations (44%) compared with placebo + lithium/divalproex, and similar reductions in events were observed relative to lithium monotherapy. In the base-case analysis from the payer perspective, the discounted incremental cost per QALY for quetiapine XR + lithium/divalproex compared with placebo + lithium/divalproex was $US22 959, and compared with lithium monotherapy was $US100 235, while all other comparators were dominated. PSA showed these results to be robust to select assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: Quetiapine XR + lithium/divalproex may be a cost-effective maintenance treatment option for patients with BPD I.

In-patient care costs of patients with bipolar I disorder: a comparison between two European centers.

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder (BPD) is a disabling disease with high morbidity rates. An international (Spain, France) comparative study about hospitalizations and in-patient care costs associated with BPD I was performed. Centers were included if they had access to a database of computerized patient charts exhaustively covering a defined catchment area. METHODS: Economic evaluation was performed by multiplying the average cumulated annual length of stay (LOS) of hospitalized bipolar patients by a full cost per day of hospitalization in each center to obtain the corresponding annual costs. RESULTS: Hospitalization rates per annum and per 100,000 individuals (general population aged 15+) were similar between France (43.6) and Spain (43.1). There were only slight differences in relation to length of stay (LOS) per patient hospitalized with 18.1 days in Spain and 20.4 days in France. The overall estimated annual hospitalization costs were in the same order of magnitude after adjustment to an adult population of 100,000: euro 232,000 (Spain) and euro 226,500 (France). Mixed episodes had the longest LOS followed by depressive episodes, while manic episodes had the shortest ones. Mania was the most costly disorder representing 53.7% of annual BPD in-patient care costs. CONCLUSIONS: BPD I care requires large resources and frequent hospitalizations, especially during manic episodes. Depressive and mixed episodes require longer hospital stays than manic episodes. Out-patient costs should now be evaluated.

Cost-effectiveness of quetiapine with lithium or divalproex for maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder.

BACKGROUND: Bipolar I disorder is a recurrent illness that affects 1% of the US population and constitutes a large economic burden. Few studies have investigated the cost-effectiveness of maintenance treatment options. The objective of this analysis was to assess the cost-effectiveness of quetiapine (QTP) in combination with lithium (Li) or divalproex (DVP) compared with that of Li or DVP alone for maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness of maintenance treatment with QTP in combination with Li or DVP was compared with placebo (PBO) in combination with Li or DVP from a US direct costs perspective using a Markov model. The model simulated a cohort of 1,000 stabilized patients with bipolar I disorder and estimated the quarterly risk in three health states: euthymia, mania, and depression. Efficacy data were derived from two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials comparing QTP + Li/DVP with PBO + Li/DVP for up to 2 years. Resource data were obtained from published literature. Direct costs included drug costs, hospitalizations, and physician visits. Outcomes and costs were discounted at 3% and the price reference year was 2007. Endpoints included the number of acute mood episodes, hospitalizations due to an acute mood event, and costs per quality-adjusted life-years. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was conducted to evaluate uncertainty. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, QTP + Li/DVP dominated PBO + Li/DVP. The PSA showed these results to be robust. In addition, treatment with QTP + Li/DVP was associated with reductions in acute manic episodes (46%), acute depressive episodes (41%), and related hospitalizations (44%) compared with PBO + Li/DVP. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses, based on two randomized clinical trials, suggest that QTP + Li/DVP is a cost-effective maintenance treatment option for patients with bipolar I disorder compared with Li or DVP alone.

A model of the economic impact of a bipolar disorder screening program in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: Unrecognized bipolar disorder in patients presenting with a major depressive episode may lead to delayed diagnosis, inappropriate treatment, and excessive costs. This study models the cost effectiveness of screening for bipolar disorder among adults presenting for the first time with symptoms of major depressive disorder. METHOD: A decision-analysis model was used to evaluate the outcomes and cost over 5 years of screening versus not screening for bipolar disorder. Screening was defined as a 1-time administration of the Mood Disorder Questionnaire at the initial visit followed by referral to a psychiatrist for patients screening positive for bipolar disorder. Health states included correctly diagnosed bipolar disorder, unrecognized bipolar disorder, and correctly diagnosed major depressive episodes. Model outcomes included rates of correct diagnosis of bipolar disorder and discounted costs (2006 US dollars) of screening and treating major depressive episodes. Literature was the primary source of data and was collected from September 2007 through March 2009. RESULTS: According to the model, 1,000 adults in a health plan with 1 million adult members annually present with symptoms of major depressive disorder. An additional 38 patients were correctly diagnosed with depression (unipolar or a major depressive episode) or bipolar disorder (440 with screening vs 402 without screening) through a 1-time screening for bipolar disorder. Estimated 5-year discounted costs per patient were $36,044 without screening and $34,107 with screening (savings of $1,937). Accordingly, total 5-year budgetary savings were estimated at $1.94 million. Results were most sensitive to difference in treatment costs for patients with recognized versus unrecognized bipolar disorder. CONCLUSION: A 1-time screening program for bipolar disorder, when patients first present with a major depressive episode, can reduce health care costs to managed-care plans.

Long-term mental health resource utilization and cost of care following group psychoeducation or unstructured group support for bipolar disorders: a cost-benefit analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the short- and long-term mental health resource utilization and cost of care in a sample of 120 individuals with bipolar disorders who participated in a randomized controlled efficacy trial of group psychoeducation versus unstructured group support. METHOD: Prospective, independent monitoring of DSM-IV bipolar disorder type I or II patients aged 18 to 65 years was conducted during the intervention phase (6 months) and follow-up phase (5-year postintervention) of a randomized controlled trial reporting clinical outcomes and inpatient and outpatient mental health service utilization, with estimation of cost of treatment per patient. The study was conducted from October 1997 through October 2006. RESULTS: Compared with individuals with bipolar disorder receiving the control intervention, psychoeducated patients had twice as many planned outpatient appointments, but the estimated mean cost of emergency consultation utilization was significantly less. There were trends for psychoeducated patients to opt for self-funded psychotherapy after completing group psychoeducation and to utilize more medications. However, inpatient care accounted for 40% estimated total cost in the control group but only about 15% in the psychoeducation group. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the importance of taking a long-term overview of the cost versus benefits of adjunctive psychological therapy in bipolar disorders. If viewed only in the short-term, the psychoeducation group used more mental health care resources without clear additional health gain. However, extended follow-up demonstrated a long-term advantage for psychoeducated individuals, such that, compared to an unstructured support group intervention, group psychoeducation is less costly and more effective.

Clinical and economic effects of unrecognized or inadequately treated bipolar disorder.

The authors review the literature on the clinical and economic impact of unrecognized and inadequately treated bipolar disorder, highlighting the need to improve identification and treatment of this disabling disorder. Epidemiologic data on prevalence, diagnosis, and treatment of bipolar disorder (including subthreshold conditions) are presented, including data from the recent National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Clinical factors that contribute to misdiagnosis and resulting inappropriate treatment of bipolar disorder are reviewed as well as negative clinical consequences of such misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment. The economic impact of underrecognized and inadequately treated bipolar disorder is discussed. The data provide empirical support for screening all patients diagnosed with depression for evidence of bipolar disorder before initiating treatment, to ensure that bipolar illness is not misdiagnosed and treated as unipolar mood disorder. Readers are referred to performance measures and treatment resources assembled by the STAndards for BipoLar Excellence (STABLE) Project to help clinicians screen more accurately for bipolar disorder.

Transtorno afetivo bipolar: carga da doença e custos relacionados / Bipolar disorder: burden of disease and related costs

CONTEXTO: O transtorno afetivo bipolar (TAB) é uma doença recorrente, crônica e grave. Comorbidades psiquiátricas e físicas, aumento do risco de suicídio, maior utilização de serviços de saúde e prejuízo na esfera social/profissional aumentam significativamente a carga e custos relacionados à doença. OBJETIVOS: Revisar aspectos clínicos, de carga da doença e conseqüentes desfechos financeiros do TAB. MÉTODOS: Pesquisa de base de dados MEDLINE/PubMed utilizando os termos bipolar disorder, epidemiology, burden of disease, comorbidity, cost of illness, outcomes e financial consequences, publicados entre 1980 e 2006. RESULTADOS: O TAB apresenta alta comorbidade com outros transtornos, o que agrava seu prognóstico e eleva os custos com os serviços de saúde. Os indivíduos com TAB apresentam mais fatores de risco cardiovascular e, conseqüentemente, maior risco de morte por evento cardíaco. O atraso e o erro diagnóstico no TAB elevam consideravelmente a carga e os custos da doença. CONCLUSÕES: As comorbidades, o risco de suicídio, o prejuízo social/profissional e a baixa adesão ao tratamento contribuem para a alta carga e os custos associados à doença. A pesquisa de comorbidades pode ajudar os médicos a ajustarem suas estratégias de tratamento, considerando cuidadosamente todos os fatores de risco e custos associados, fatores estes que devem ser levados em conta também pelos profissionais que trabalham com gestão de saúde, tanto no setor privado quanto público.

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder (BD) is a recurrent, chronic and severe disease. Mental and physical comorbidities, risk of suicide, health services use and impairment of social and professional domains significantly worsen the burden and increase the costs of illness. OBJECTIVES: Review clinical aspects, burden of disease, and consequent financial outcomes of BD. METHODS: MEDLINE/PubMed database search using the terms bipolar disorder, epidemiology, burden of disease, comorbidity, cost of illness, outcomes e financial consequences, published in MEDLINE from 1980 to 2006. RESULTS: BD has a high rate of comorbidities, which worsen the prognosis and increase costs with health services. Subjects with BD have more cardiovascular risk factors than the general population, and therefore a higher risk of death by cardiovascular event. Delay of diagnosis and misdiagnosis increase the costs of illness. DISCUSSION: Comorbidities, risk of suicide, social and professional impairment and low adherence to treatment increase the cost of illness. The search of comorbidities may help clinicians to adjust treatment strategies, taking into account all associated risk factors and costs, which may be considered also by professionals involved in health care management, either private or public.

Increasing lifestyle physical activity in patients with depression or other serious mental illness.

People with severe and persistent mental illness are more likely to be overweight and to suffer from obesity-related illnesses such as diabetes and heart disease than healthy individuals. Lifestyle change interventions that emphasize integrating physical activity into daily life have not been studied extensively in people with mental illness. The authors present the results of an initial feasibility study of a lifestyle modification program for individuals with serious mental illness. Thirty-nine individuals with depression or other serious mental illness were recruited from three different mental health facilities to attend an 18-week lifestyle intervention program promoting physical activity and healthy eating. At each session, participants discussed topics related to healthy lifestyle changes and participated in group walks. Data were collected at baseline, 6 weeks, and 18 weeks. The results demonstrated that individuals who have depression and other serious mental illnesses can participate in a lifestyle intervention program. Participants who attended the final follow-up session had lost weight over the course of the intervention. Study retention was a problem. However, the cost of this type of group-based lifestyle intervention was relatively low, so that such an intervention for this high-risk group may still be cost-effective.

[Cost of care for depressive disorders in primary and specialized care in Germany]. / Behandlungskosten von Patienten mit Depressionsdiagnose in haus- und fachärztlicher Versorgung in Deutschland.

Service utilization and total direct cost of care was assessed in 270 patients suffering from depressive disorder. Patients were recruited from primary care physicians or family doctors (n = 43) or psychiatrists (n = 23) in office practice, from three different regions in Germany (county of Düren and city of Aachen, Lörrach-county, city of Munich). A detailed catalogue of unit costs (including inpatient, outpatient and rehabilitative services) was used for calculating total cost of care on an individual basis. Service utilization and costs referred to 2001. Mean cost of total medical care of the study patients was euro 3849 (excluding cost of drugs for physical illness). The cost for treating depressive disorders and additional psychiatric co-morbidity (which is included into the total cost of care) was euro 2073 per patient and year. When cross-checking with ICD-10 criteria for depressive disorders, the original diagnosis by family doctors or psychiatrists could be confirmed in 186 patients of the total sample (n = 270), suggesting that there is a high amount of falsely diagnosed patients in primary and specialized care of depressive patients in Germany. Direct cost of the 186 confirmed patients was higher (total care cost: euro 4715, cost for treatment of depression and psychiatric co-morbidity: euro 2541) than in the total group and should be considered as reference cost, when discussing cost of care in depressive patients in Germany. Results suggest to analyse cost of care in depressive patients further and to discuss a more efficient allocation of health budgets in the field.

[Annual costs of bipolar disorders in Germany]. / Jährliche Krankheitskosten bipolarer Störungen in Deutschland.

With costs of approximately 5.8 billion EUR annually, bipolar disorders represent a substantial burden on German society. The costs are mainly due to high indirect costs caused by morbidity-related unemployment, suicide-related losses of productivity, time off from work, and early retirement. Inpatient care, with a considerable average length of stay for patients with bipolar disorders, accounts for two-thirds of direct costs. This paper refers to statistics on use of healthcare services based primarily on the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision. Representing a relatively narrow definition of bipolar disorders in comparison with the clinically relevant spectrum, this classification leads to a conservative estimate of the total costs. The significant lag between first acute episode and a correct diagnosis causes a delayed onset of maintenance treatment that leads to increased costs. Increasing public awareness, destigmatizing the disease, and educating physicians are necessary steps to limit the substantial economic burden for society.