Medication adherence and costs of medical care among patients with Parkinson's disease: an observational study using electronic medical records.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to antiparkinsonian drugs (APDs) is critical for patients with Parkinson's disease (PD), for which medication is the main therapeutic strategy. Previous studies have focused on specific disorders in a single system when assessing clinical factors affecting adherence to PD treatment, and no international comparative data are available on the medical costs for Chinese patients with PD. The present study aimed to evaluate medication adherence and its associated factors among Chinese patients with PD using a systematic approach and to explore the impact of adequate medication adherence on direct medical costs. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using the electronic medical records of patients with PD from a medical center in China. Patients with a minimum of two APD prescriptions from January 1, 2016 to August 15, 2018 were included. Medication possession ratio (MPR) and proportion of days covered were used to measure APD adherence. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to identify factors affecting APD adherence. Gamma regression analysis was used to explore the impact of APD adherence on direct medical costs. RESULTS: In total, 1,712 patients were included in the study, and the mean MPR was 0.68 (± 0.25). Increased number of APDs and all medications, and higher daily levodopa-equivalent doses resulted in higher MPR (mean difference [MD] = 0.04 [0.03-0.05]; MD = 0.02 [0.01-0.03]; MD = 0.03 [0.01-0.04], respectively); combined digestive system diseases, epilepsy, or older age resulted in lower MPR (MD = -0.06 [-0.09 to -0.03]; MD = -0.07 [-0.14 to -0.01]; MD = -0.02 [-0.03 to -0.01], respectively). Higher APD adherence resulted in higher direct medical costs, including APD and other outpatient costs. For a 0.3 increase in MPR, the two costs increased by $34.42 ($25.43-$43.41) and $14.63 ($4.86-$24.39) per year, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: APD adherence rate among Chinese patients with PD was moderate and related primarily to age, comorbidities, and healthcare costs. The factors should be considered when prescribing APDs.

Comparison of the effectiveness, safety, and costs of anti-Parkinson drugs: A multiple-center retrospective study.

AIMS: This study aimed to systematically compare the effectiveness, safety, and costs of different anti-Parkinson drugs (APDs). METHODS: This is a multi-center study that retrospectively analyzed the data of 8420 outpatients with PD from 2014 to 2019 across 30 tertiary hospitals in China. The effectiveness was evaluated by changes in total dosages of APDs, normalized by levodopa equivalent dose (LED) and presented as ΔLEDs; levodopa equivalent dose cost (LEDc) represented the daily cost of APDs; and newly added diagnostics were represented as APDs-related adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 384 patients with eligible medical records for three consecutive years were enrolled. Patients treated with carbidopa/levodopa or levodopa/benserazide had significantly lower mean ΔLEDs than other groups (p < 0.01), followed by pramipexole and selegiline. The piribedil group had the highest ΔLEDs, with mean differences of 112.56-355.04 mg compared to other groups (p < 0.01). Meanwhile, LEDc in the levodopa/benserazide, carbidopa/levodopa, and piribedil groups were significantly lower than those in pramipexole or selegiline groups ($0.088-0.135/day for levodopa/benserazide; $0.070-0.126/day for carbidopa/levodopa; $0.112-0.138/day for piribedil; $0.290-0.332/day for pramipexole; $0.229-0.544/day for selegiline; p < 0.01). Patients with piribedil had more adverse events, with an incidence rate of 35.7%, followed by levodopa/benserazide (25.6%), selegiline (23.5%), carbidopa/levodopa (23.3%), and pramipexole (16.4%). Pramipexole showed a lower incidence rate of adverse events than piribedil, including neuropsychiatric symptoms (p = 0.006), headache/dizziness (p = 0.016), and gastrointestinal symptoms (p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: Carbidopa/levodopa or levodopa/benserazide might exhibit better clinical improvement with less medical cost, while piribedil presented less clinical improvement but a higher risk of headache/dizziness, gastrointestinal, and neuropsychiatric symptoms.

The impact of China's zero markup drug policy on drug costs for managing Parkinson's disease and its complications: an interrupted time series analysis.

Background: In April 2009, the Chinese government launched Zero Markup Drug Policy (ZMDP) to adjust medical institutions' revenue and expenditure structures. Objective: This study evaluated the impact of implementing ZMDP (as an intervention) on the drug costs for managing Parkinson's disease (PD) and its complications from the healthcare providers' perspective. Methods: The drug costs for managing PD and its complications per outpatient visit or inpatient stay were estimated using electronic health data from a tertiary hospital in China from January 2016 to August 2018. An interrupted time series analysis was conducted to evaluate the immediate change following the intervention (step change, ß1) and the change in slope, comparing post-intervention with the pre-intervention period (trend change, ß2). Subgroup analyses were conducted in outpatients within the strata of age, patients with or without health insurance, and whether drugs were listed in the national Essential Medicine List (EML). Results: Overall, 18,158 outpatient visits and 366 inpatient stays were included. Outpatient (ß1 = -201.7, 95%CI: -285.4, -117.9) and inpatient (ß1 = -372.1, 95% CI: -643.6, -100.6) drug costs for managing PD significantly decreased when implementing ZMDP. However, for outpatients without health insurance, the trend change in drug costs for managing PD (ß2 = 16.8, 95% CI: 8.0, 25.6) or PD complications (ß2 = 12.6, 95% CI: 5.5, 19.7) significantly increased. Trend changes in outpatient drug costs for managing PD differed when stratifying drugs listed in EML (ß2 = -1.4, 95% CI: -2.6, -0.2) or not (ß2 = 6.3, 95%CI: 2.0, 10.7). Trend changes of outpatient drug costs for managing PD complications significantly increased in drugs listed in EML (ß2 = 14.7, 95% CI 9.2, 20.3), patients without health insurance (ß2 = 12.6, 95% CI 5.5, 19.7), and age under 65 (ß2 = 24.3, 95% CI 17.3, 31.4). Conclusions: Drug costs for managing PD and its complications significantly decreased when implementing ZMDP. However, the trend in drug costs increased significantly in several subgroups, which may offset the decrease at the implementation.

Evaluating the direct medical cost, drug utilization and expenditure for managing Parkinson's disease: a costing study at a medical center in China.

Background: With long-term pharmacotherapy, Parkinson's disease (PD) is expectedly to incur a significant healthcare burden. However, drug utilization and costing study is limited, so is the cost composition and its impact on resource allocation. This study took a healthcare provider's perspective to quantify medical and drug expenses and the utilization of drugs for managing PD and its complications. Methods: Medical resources use and associated cost of outpatient visits and inpatient admission episodes for PD patients were extracted from electronic medical records at a tertiary hospital in China from 1 January 2016 to 15 August 2018. Total and average direct medical (costs of outpatient visits and inpatient admission episodes) and drug costs were calculated during the study period and each calendar year. Drug cost was quantified by defined daily dose cost (DDDc) and levodopa equivalent dose cost (LEDc) per outpatient visit or inpatient admission episode for PD in Chinese yuan (¥), stratified by medication categories, and presented in descriptive statistics. Results: Overall, 18,158 outpatient visits and 366 inpatient admissions were incurred by 2,640 outpatients and 330 inpatients, with a median age of 71.0 and 73.5 years, respectively. Drug cost accounted for 97.82% and 23.33% of outpatient and inpatient medical expenditure. The average cost of drugs for managing PD accounted for 60.48% (¥952.50) and 2.70% (¥564.90) of cost per outpatient visit and inpatient episode, while drugs for managing PD complications was 11.38% and 0.70%, respectively. The highest DDDc and LEDc of drugs for managing PD per outpatient visit or inpatient episode were incurred by pramipexole (¥56.90-72.70 and ¥227.48-290.67) and entacapone (¥37.70-45.70 and ¥228.64-276.77). The DDDc and LEDc of pramipexole is more than 10 times that of levodopa/benserazide (DDDc: ¥4.90-5.70; LEDc: ¥10.14-11.98) and carbidopa/levodopa (DDDc: ¥4.00-5.00; LEDc: ¥11.02-13.95). Conclusions: The outpatient direct medical cost for patients with PD was predominantly attributed to drug cost for managing PD, but drug cost weighed less of the inpatient cost. After adjusting the dose and number of patients, drugs with indirect dopamine effects had an excessively higher cost than dopamine precursors. Their long-term cost-effectiveness in real-world settings warrants further studies.

Efficacy, Safety, and Economics of Intravenous Levetiracetam for Status Epilepticus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy, safety, and economics profiles of intravenous levetiracetam (LEV) for status epilepticus (SE). METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.gov, and OpenGrey.eu for eligible studies published from inception to June 12th 2019. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effect model to calculate odds ratio (OR) of included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS: A total of 478 studies were obtained. Five systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses, 9 RCTs, 1 non-randomized trial, and 27 case series/reports and 1 economic study met the inclusion criteria. Five SRs indicated no statistically significant difference in rates of seizure cessation when LEV was compared with lorazepam (LOR), phenytoin (PHT), or valproate (VPA). Pooled results of included RCTs indicated no statistically significant difference in seizure cessation when LEV was compared with LOR [OR = 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 2.92], PHT (OR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.27), and VPA (OR = 1.47, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.67); and no statistically significant difference in seizure freedom within 24 h compared with LOR [OR = 1.83, 95% CI 0.57 to 5.90] and PHT (OR = 1.08, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.87). Meanwhile, LEV did not increase the risk of mortality during hospitalization compared with LOR (OR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.31 to 3.39), PHT (OR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.37 to 2.10), VPA (OR = 1.28, 95% CI 0.32 to 5.07), and placebo (plus clonazepam, OR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.16 to 3.38). LEV had lower need for artificial ventilation (OR = 0.23, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.92) and a lower risk of hypotension (OR = 0.15, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.84) compared to LOR. A trend of lower risk of hypotension and higher risk of agitation was found when LEV was compared with PHT. Case series and case report studies indicated psychiatric and behavioral adverse events of LEV. Cost-effectiveness evaluations indicated LEV as the most cost-effective non-benzodiazepines anti-epileptic drug (AED). CONCLUSIONS: LEV has a similar efficacy as LOR, PHT, and VPA for SE, but a lower need for ventilator assistance and risk of hypotension, thus can be used as a second-line treatment for SE. However, more well-conducted studies to confirm the role of intravenous LEV for SE are still needed.

Comparative cost-effectiveness of amisulpride and olanzapine in the treatment of schizophrenia in China.

BACKGROUND: Both amisulpride and olanzapine are leading treatments for schizophrenia in China. This study aimed to investigate the long-term cost-effectiveness of amisulpride and olanzapine in the treatment of schizophrenia in China. METHODS: A decision-analytic Markov model was developed to simulate the lifetime clinical and economic outcomes of schizophrenia treatment from the healthcare payer perspective. The long-term costs and QALYs were estimated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the impact of variance of parameters on the results. RESULTS: Treatment with amisulpride provided an effectiveness gain of 16.59 QALYs at an average cost of USD 25,884 whereas olanzapine resulted in 16.38 QALYs at a cost of USD 34,839 over a lifetime horizon. One-way sensitivity analysis suggested that the most sensitive variable was the unit cost of olanzapine. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis based on a Monte Carlo simulation with a lifetime horizon, the probability of amisulpride being cost-effective was 99.8% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of USD 9,322, the GDP per capita in China 2018. A scenario analysis with updated olanzapine unit cost suggested an ICER of 7,857 USD/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Amisulpride is likely to be a cost-effective option with increased effectiveness compared with olanzapine in the treatment of schizophrenia patients in China.

Economic burden for Alzheimer's disease in China from 2010 to 2050: a modelling study.

Objectives: We aimed to conduct a modelling study to estimate and predict the economic burden of AD to support the healthcare management of AD in China. Methods: The economic burden of AD was estimated with an evaluation of the prevalence of AD patients and a simulation of annual resource use and cost per AD patient in China using a published model. Percentage of AD patients being treated was assumed to be 5% from 2010 to 2050, with three scenarios testing the value of this parameter of 10%, 20% and 40% throughout 2020 to 2050. Results: The costs of AD were estimated to be from around 91 billion RMB in 2010 to 332 billion in 2050. Most of the current burden was related to private caregivers paid by families. With the percentage of patients being treated changing from 5% to 40%, costs were estimated to double. This was related to more hospitalisations and more use of care facilities, while the burden for families would decrease. Conclusion: A high economic burden related to AD is predicted. The burden would be driven mainly by indirect costs related to the social support of the patients. Investment in improving awareness and care of AD patients is needed and worth it.

Levetiracetam for epilepsy: an evidence map of efficacy, safety and economic profiles.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, safety and economics of levetiracetam (LEV) for epilepsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, OpenGrey.eu and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for systematic reviews (SRs), meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, case reports and economic studies published from January 2007 to April 2018. We used a bubble plot to graphically display information of included studies and conducted meta-analyses to quantitatively synthesize the evidence. RESULTS: A total of 14,803 records were obtained. We included 30 SRs/meta-analyses, 34 RCTs, 18 observational studies, 58 case reports and 2 economic studies after the screening process. The included SRs enrolled patients with pediatric epilepsy, epilepsy in pregnancy, focal epilepsy, generalized epilepsy and refractory focal epilepsy. Meta-analysis of the included RCTs indicated that LEV was as effective as carbamazepine (CBZ; treatment for 6 months: 58.9% vs 64.8%, OR=0.76, 95% CI: 0.50-1.16; 12 months: 54.9% vs 55.5%, OR=1.24, 95% CI: 0.79-1.93), oxcarbazepine (57.7% vs 59.8%, OR=1.34, 95% CI: 0.34-5.23), phenobarbital (50.0% vs 50.9%, OR=1.20, 95% CI: 0.51-2.82) and lamotrigine (LTG; 61.5% vs 57.7%, OR=1.22, 95% CI: 0.90-1.66). SRs and observational studies indicated a low malformation rate and intrauterine death rate for pregnant women, as well as low risk of cognitive side effects. But psychiatric and behavioral side effects could not be ruled out. LEV decreased discontinuation due to adverse events compared with CBZ (OR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.41-0.65), while no difference was found when LEV was compared with placebo and LTG. Two cost-effectiveness evaluations for refractory epilepsy with decision-tree model showed US$ 76.18 per seizure-free day gained in Canada and US$ 44 per seizure-free day gained in Korea. CONCLUSION: LEV is as effective as CBZ, oxcarbazepine, phenobarbital and LTG and has an advantage for pregnant women and in cognitive functions. Limited evidence supports its cost-effectiveness. REGISTERED NUMBER: PROSPERO (No CRD 42017069367).

Comparative efficacy and safety between amisulpride and olanzapine in schizophrenia treatment and a cost analysis in China: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and cost-minimization analysis.

BACKGROUND: Amisulpride was introduced into China in 2010 as a second-generation atypical antipsychotic, while olanzapine has been on the market since 1999 as one of the leading treatments for schizophrenia in China. Since more Chinese patients are gaining access to amisulpride, the study aims to compare the efficacy, safety, and costs between amisulpride and olanzapine for schizophrenia treatment in China. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and WanFang database were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to July 2018. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was utilized to assess the quality of included studies. A meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of amisulpride and olanzapine, followed by a cost-minimization analysis using local drug and medical costs reported in China. RESULTS: Twenty RCTs with 2000 patients were included in the systematic review. There were no significant differences between amisulpride and olanzapine on efficacy measures based on scores from the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms, the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale and the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity or Improvement. For safety outcomes, amisulpride was associated with lower fasting blood glucose and less abnormal liver functions as well as significantly lower risks of weight gain, constipation, and somnolence; olanzapine was associated with significantly lower risks of insomnia and lactation/amenorrhea/sexual hormone disorder. No significant differences were found in risks of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), tremor, akathisia, abnormal corrected QT interval. Cost-minimization analysis showed that amisulpride was likely to be a cost-saving alternative in China, with potential savings of 1358 Chinese Yuan (CNY) per patient for a three-month schizophrenia treatment compared with olanzapine. CONCLUSION: As the first meta-analysis and cost-minimization analysis comparing the efficacy, safety and cost of amisulpride and olanzapine within a Chinese setting, the study suggests that amisulpride may be an effective, well-tolerated, and cost-saving antipsychotic drug alternative in China.

Levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone versus levodopa/dopa-decarboxyiase inhibitor for the treatment of Parkinson's disease: systematic review, meta-analysis, and economic evaluation.

AIMS: To review the evidence for efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone (LCE) compared with levodopa/dopa-decarboxyiase inhibitor (DDCI) for Parkinson's disease (PD). METHODS: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Chinese databases WangFang Data, Chinese Sci-tech Journals Database and China National Knowledge Infrastructure, as well as ClinicalTrials.gov, were searched for randomized controlled trials with "levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone" as keywords. The search period was from inception to August 2017. We conducted meta-analyses to synthesize the evidence quantitatively. RESULTS: A total of 5,693 records were obtained. We included seven randomized controlled trials and one cost-effectiveness study after the screening process. Compared with levodopa-DDCI, LCE improved patient Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) II score (mean difference [MD] -1.17, 95% CI -1.64 to -0.71), UPDRS III score (MD -1.55, 95% CI -2.29 to -0.81), and Schwab and England daily activity rating (MD 2.05, 95% CI 0.85-3.26). There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of serious adverse events (AEs) or discontinuation due to AEs in patients with LCE, and the risk of total AEs was higher in the LCE group (risk ratio [RR] 1.33, 95% CI 1.05-1.70). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of LCE was £3,105 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained in the UK. CONCLUSION: LCE can improve PD patients' motor symptoms and daily living functioning when compared with levodopa/DDCI.

An evaluation of clinical pharmacist service on a neurology care unit.

BACKGROUND: Medications used to treat neurological diseases may result in adverse effects. Research is needed to demonstrate pharmacist value and their roles in patient care. OBJECTIVE: To categorize the types and severities of the prescribing errors intercepted and to describe clinical activities conducted by neurology ward pharmacists. METHOD: Pharmacists prospectively reviewed medication orders over an 18-month period with inventions documented and categorized. RESULTS: A total of 341 prescribing errors in 1183 patients were intercepted. The most common error types were dosing frequency (35.8 %) and medication selection (21.5 %). The top five most detected error medications were those indicated for hyperhomocysteinemia (22.0 %), stress ulcer prophylaxis (12.3 %), poor circulation (10.9 %), hyperglycemia (6.5 %), and infections (5.9 %). Although 67.5 % of the detected errors having the potential causing no harm, 26.4 % of the errors may require intervention, and 6.2 % may increase the length of stay. The number of errors decreased from 19 to 10 per month during the study period. Clinical pharmacists also actively engaged in medication use evaluation, clinical decision support system optimization, and education to patients and providers. CONCLUSION: Presence of clinical pharmacists at the neurology unit may help in early detection of prescribing errors with increased patient safety.