Costs, length of stay, and mortality of super-refractory status epilepticus: A population-based study from Germany.

OBJECTIVE: Super-refractory status epilepticus (SRSE) is a severe condition in which a patient in status epilepticus (SE) for ≥24 h does not respond to first-, second-, or third-line therapy. The economic impact of SRSE treatment remains unclear. A health insurance research database was used for a population-based estimation of SRSE-associated inpatient costs, length of stay, and mortality in Germany. METHODS: An algorithm using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition coding and treatment parameters identified and classified patients in a German statutory health insurance database covering admissions from 2008 to 2013 as having refractory SE (RSE) or SRSE. Admissions data in our study refer to these classifications. Associated patient data included costs, procedures, and demographics. RESULTS: The algorithm identified 2,585 (all type) SE admissions, classified as 1,655 nonrefractory SE (64%), 592 (22.9%) RSE, and 338 (13.1%) SRSE, producing database incidence rates of 15.0 in 100,000, 5.2 in 100,000, and 3.0 in 100,000 per year, respectively. Median cost per admission was €4,063 for nonrefractory SE, €4,581 (p < 0.001) for RSE, and €32,706 (p < 0.001) for SRSE. Median length of stay varied significantly between 8 days (mean = 13.6) in nonrefractory SE, 14 days in RSE, and up to 37 days in SRSE. Discharge mortality increased from 9.6% in nonrefractory SE to 15.0% (p < 0.001) in RSE and 39.9% (p < 0.001) in SRSE. SIGNIFICANCE: This study evaluated the hospital treatment costs associated with admissions classified by the algorithm as SRSE in Germany. SRSE represented 13% of all SE admissions, but resulted in 56% of all SE-related costs. The lack of approved treatments and limited number of evidence-based treatment guidelines highlight the need for further evaluations of the SRSE burden of illness and the potential for further optimization of treatments for SRSE.

Challenges of Developing an Observable Parent-Reported Measure: A Qualitative Study of Functional Impact of ADHD in Children.

BACKGROUND: Informant-reported outcome measures, usually completed by parents, are often administered in pediatric clinical trials with the intention of collecting data to support claims in a medical product label. Recently, there has been an emphasis on limiting these measures to observable content, as recommended in the US Food and Drug Administration guidance on patient-reported outcomes. This qualitative study explores the concept of observability using the example of childhood attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: Concept elicitation interviews were conducted with children (aged 6-12 years) diagnosed with ADHD and parents of children with ADHD to identify concepts for a potential parent-reported measure of functional impact of childhood ADHD. The observability of each concept was considered. RESULTS: Of the 30 parents (90% females; mean age = 42.0 years), 24 had a child who was also interviewed (87.5% males; mean age = 9.6 years). Areas of functional impact reported by parents and/or children included the following: 1) functioning within the home/family, 2) academic performance, 3) school behavior, 4) social functioning, 5) emotional functioning, and 6) decreased self-efficacy. Parents cited many examples of direct observation at home, but opportunities for observation of some important areas of impact (e.g., school behavior and peer relationships) were limited. CONCLUSIONS: Findings illustrate the substantial functional impairment associated with childhood ADHD while highlighting the challenges of developing informant-reported outcome measures limited to observable content. Because ADHD has an impact on children's functioning in a wide range of contexts, a parent-report measure that includes only observable content may fail to capture important aspects of functional impairment. Approaches for addressing this observability challenge are discussed.

Evaluating Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparisons in Practice: A Case Study of Patients with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

Differences in patient characteristics across trials may bias efficacy estimates from indirect treatment comparisons. To address this issue, matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) measures treatment efficacy after weighting individual patient data to match patient characteristics across trials. To date, however, there is no consensus on how best to implement MAIC. To address this issue, we applied MAIC to measure how two attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treatments (guanfacine extended release and atomoxetine hydrochloride) affect patients' ADHD symptoms, as measured by the ADHD Rating Scale IV score. We tested MAIC sensitivity to: matched patient characteristics, matched statistical moments, weighting matrix, and placebo-arm matching (i.e., matching on outcomes in the placebo arm). After applying MAIC, guanfacine and atomoxetine had similar reductions in ADHD symptoms (Δ: 0.4, p < 0.737). The results were similar for three of four sensitivity analyses. When we applied MAIC with placebo-arm matching, however, guanfacine reduced symptoms more than atomoxetine (Δ: -3.9, p < 0.004). We discuss the implication of this finding and advise MAIC practitioners to carefully consider the use of placebo-arm matching, depending on the presence of residual confounding across trials. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Estimating minimal important differences for several scales assessing function and quality of life in patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Defining minimal important difference (MID) is critical to interpreting patient-reported outcomes data and treatment efficacy in clinical trials. This study estimates the MID for the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent Report (WFIRS-P) and the Child Health and Illness Profile-Parent Report (CHIP-CE-PRF76) among parents of young people with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the UK. METHODS: Parents of children (6-12 years; n=100) and adolescents (13-17 years; n=117) with ADHD completed a socio-demographic form, the CHIP-CE-PRF76, the WFIRS-P, and the Pediatric Quality of Life scale at baseline and 4 weeks later. At follow-up, a subset of parents completed anchor questions measuring change in the child/adolescent from baseline. MIDs were estimated using anchor-based and distribution-based methods, and separately for children and adolescents. RESULTS: The MID estimates for overall change in the WFIRS-P total score ranged from 11.31 (standard error of measurement) to 13.47 (anchor) for the total sample. The range of MID estimates for the CHIP-CE-PRF76 varied by domain: 6.80-7.41 (satisfaction), 6.18-7.34 (comfort), 5.60-6.72 (resilience), 6.06-7.57 (risk avoidance), and 4.00-5.63 (achievement) for the total sample. Overall, MID estimates for WFIRS-P MID and CHIP-CE-PRF76 were slightly higher for adolescents than for children. CONCLUSION: This study estimated MIDs for these instruments using several methods. The observed convergence of the MID estimates increases confidence in their reliability and could assist clinicians and decision makers in deriving meaningful interpretations of observed changes in the WFIRS-P and CHIP-CE in clinical trials and practice.

PRISM, a Patient-Reported Outcome Instrument, Accurately Measures Symptom Change in Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) experience relief following treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) (Vakil et al. in Am J Gastroenterol 101:1900-1920, 2006; Everhart and Ruhl in Gastroenterology 136:376-386, 2009). As many as 17-44% of patients, however, exhibit only partial response to therapy. Most extant GERD patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments fail to meet development best practices as described by the FDA (Talley and Wiklund in Qual Life Res 14:21-33, 2005; Van Pinxteren et al. in Cochrane Database Syst Rev 18:CD002095, 2004; El-Serag et al. in Aliment Pharmacol Ther 32:720-737, 2010). AIM: To develop and validate a PRO instrument for clinical trials involving patients with GERD who are PPI partial responders. METHODS: We prepared a systematic literature review, held patient focus groups, convened an expert panel, and conducted cognitive interviews to establish content validity. Eligible participants took PPI therapy for at least 8 weeks, had undergone an upper endoscopy, and scored at least 8 points on the GerdQ [6]. Qualitative data guided development of 26 draft items. Items were reviewed by expert panels and debriefed with patients. The resulting 21-item instrument underwent psychometric evaluation during a Phase IIB trial. RESULTS: During the trial, confirmatory factor analysis (n = 220) resulted in a four-factor model displaying the highest goodness of fit. All domains had a high inter-item correlation (Cronbach's α > 0.8). Test-retest reliability and convergent validity were strong, with highly significant (p < 0.01) correlations between average weekly PRISM scores and severity anchors and significant (p < 0.05) correlations with anchor subscales. Cumulative distribution functions revealed significant differences between responders and non-responders. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis in a clinical trial setting demonstrated strong psychometric properties suggesting validity of PRISM. Developed in line with FDA guidance on PROs, PRISM represents an important new outcome measure for patients with GERD with a partial response to PPI therapy.

Developing a Risk Score to Guide Individualized Treatment Selection in Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a risk score for treatment failure that could potentially be used to individualize treatment selection between lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and osmotic-release oral system methylphenidate (OROS-MPH) in children and adolescents with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: The study used data from patients with ADHD receiving LDX (N = 104) or OROS-MPH (N = 107) in a phase III randomized clinical trial. A prediction model was developed to estimate risk scores for failing OROS-MPH, where treatment failure was defined as less than 25% improvement in the ADHD Rating Scale IV total score from baseline. Patients were ranked by their predicted risks of OROS-MPH failure to define high-risk subpopulations. Outcomes of LDX and OROS-MPH were compared within subpopulations. RESULTS: The prediction model for OROS-MPH failure selected seven predictors (age, disease duration, and five ADHD Rating Scale IV item scores) and had an in-sample C statistic of 0.860. Among all patients, LDX had a 17% (95% confidence interval 7.1%-27.8%) lower treatment failure rate than that of OROS-MPH; differences in failure rates ranged from 17% to 43% across subpopulations, increasingly enriched for high-risk patients. Similar heterogeneity across subgroups was observed for other efficacy measures. CONCLUSIONS: In the overall trial population, LDX was associated with a lower rate of treatment failure compared with OROS-MPH in patients with ADHD. A more pronounced benefit of LDX over OROS-MPH was observed among subpopulations with a higher predicted risk of failing OROS-MPH. The present study showed the feasibility of individualizing treatment selection. Future research is needed to prospectively verify these results.

Evaluating functional outcomes in adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: development and initial testing of a self-report instrument.

BACKGROUND: Engaging adolescents in decisions about their health may enhance their compliance with treatment and result in better health outcomes. Treatment outcomes in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are rarely evaluated from the adolescents' point of view. There is also concern that adolescents with ADHD may not have insight about the impacts of their disease. This article describes research conducted to understand the experiences of adolescents with ADHD and how the research was used to develop an adolescent self-report instrument. METHODS: This research involved an iterative process to ensure content validity and was conducted in the following stages: concept identification from literature reviews and interviews with teachers and clinicians; concept elicitation interviews with adolescents with ADHD and their caregivers, review of existing instruments; development of a new instrument and cognitive interviews. Experts in instrument development and translation and clinical practitioners in ADHD also participated. RESULTS: A conceptual framework to measure the impact of ADHD on adolescent functioning identified from concept identification research informed concept elicitation interviews with 60 adolescents with ADHD and their primary caregivers. In the interviews, adolescents discussed difficulties with performing activities in various contexts: school, home, leisure activities and social interactions. Caregivers provided additional insights. The instrument review revealed that none of the existing instruments were suitable to collect data on the elicited concepts; therefore, a new instrument was developed. Revisions were made to the format and content of the instrument (a daily diary) based on feedback received from cognitive testing with 15 adolescents. CONCLUSIONS: Our research helped to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the impacts of ADHD on adolescent functioning, to inform the development of a new instrument for measuring outcomes. Adolescents were able to discuss the impact of ADHD on their lives in concept elicitation interviews and report the impacts of ADHD on a self-report instrument. The new instrument developed to reflect the perspective of adolescents with ADHD can be used to supplement outcome assessments in clinic and research settings. Scientific advocacy for the use of such measures can be valuable to measure outcomes meaningful to adolescents with ADHD and the clinical community.

Psychometric validation of the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent Report Form in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

BACKGROUND: Measurement properties of the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent Report Form (WFIRS-P), which assesses attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)-related functional impairment in children/adolescents (6-17 years), were examined. METHODS: Data from seven randomized, controlled trials were pooled. Analyses were conducted in two random half-samples. WFIRS-P conceptual framework was evaluated using confirmatory factor analyses (CFA). Reliability was estimated using internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) and test-retest reliability methods. Convergent validity was assessed using correlations between WFIRS-P domain scores and the ADHD-RS-IV and Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scales. Responsiveness was tested by comparing mean changes in WFIRS-P domain scores between responders and non-responders based on clinical criteria. RESULTS: CFA adequately confirmed the item-to-scale relationships defined in the WFIRS-P conceptual framework. Cronbach's alpha coefficient exceeded 0.7 for all domains and test-retest reliability exceeded 0.7 for all but Risky Activities. With few exceptions, WFIRS-P domains correlated significantly (p < 0.05) with ADHD-RS-IV Total, Inattention and Hyperactivity-Impulsivity scores and CGI-S at baseline and follow-up in both random half-samples. Mean changes in WFIRS-P domain scores differed significantly between responder and non-responder groups in the expected direction (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Study results support the reliability, validity and responsiveness of the WFIRS-P. Findings were replicated between two random samples, further demonstrating the robustness of results.

Development and validation of algorithms to identify acute diverticulitis.

PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were to develop and validate algorithms to accurately identify patients with diverticulitis using electronic medical records (EMRs). METHODS: Using Kaiser Permanente Southern California's EMRs of adults (≥18 years) with International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modifications, Ninth Revision diagnosis codes of diverticulitis (562.11, 562.13) between 1 January 2008 and 31 August 2009, we generated random samples for pilot (N = 692) and validation (N = 1502) respectively. Both samples were stratified by inpatient (IP), emergency department (ED), and outpatient (OP) care settings. We developed and validated several algorithms using EMR data on diverticulitis diagnosis code, antibiotics, computed tomography, diverticulosis history, pain medication and/or pain diagnosis, and excluding patients with infections and/or conditions that could mimic diverticulitis. Evidence of diverticulitis was confirmed through manual chart review. Agreement between EMR algorithm and manual chart confirmation was evaluated using sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV). RESULTS: Both samples were similar in socio-demographics and clinical symptoms. An algorithm based on diverticulitis diagnosis code with antibiotic prescription dispensed within 7 days of diagnosis date, performed well overall. In the validation sample, sensitivity and PPV were (84.6, 98.2%), (95.8, 98.1%), and (91.8, 82.6%) for OP, ED, and IP, respectively. CONCLUSION: Using antibiotic prescriptions to supplement diagnostic codes improved the accuracy of case identification for diverticulitis, but results varied by care setting.

Development and validation of a disease-targeted quality of life instrument for chronic diverticular disease: the DV-QOL.

BACKGROUND: Colonic diverticular disease is typically conceived as acute diverticulitis attacks surrounded by periods of clinical silence. However, evolving data indicate that many patients have persistent symptoms and diminished health-related quality of life (HRQOL) long after acute attacks. We developed a disease-targeted HRQOL measure for symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease (SUDD)-the diverticulitis quality of life (DV-QOL) instrument. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review to craft a conceptual model of SUDD HRQOL. This was complemented by three focus groups including 45 SUDD patients. We developed items based on our literature search, focus groups, and cognitive debriefings. We administered the items to SUDD patients with persistent symptoms following a confirmed diverticulitis event. We created scales based on factor analysis and evaluated the scales for reliability and validity. RESULTS: Concept elicitation revealed a range of illness experiences attributed to SUDD. Coding of 20,490 transcribed words yielded a 52-code network with four primary, condition-related concepts: (1) physical symptoms (e.g., bloating); (2) behaviors (e.g., restrictions); (3) cognitions and concerns (e.g., fear); and (4) impact and consequences (e.g., absenteeism, anxiety). Based on patient language, we developed the 17-item DV-QOL instrument. In a cross-sectional validation sample of 197 patients, DV-QOL discriminated between patients with recent versus distant diverticulitis events and correlated highly with Short Form 36 and hospital anxiety and depression scores. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SUDD attribute a wide range of negative psychological, social, and physical symptoms to their condition, both during and after acute attacks; DV-QOL captures these symptoms in a valid, reliable manner.

Economic impact of childhood/adolescent ADHD in a European setting: the Netherlands as a reference case.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a highly prevalent psychiatric disorder in children/adolescents. This study reviews available European-based studies of ADHD-related costs and applies the findings to the Netherlands to estimate annual national costs for children/adolescents from a societal perspective. A systematic literature search was conducted for primary studies in Europe, published January 1, 1990 through April 23, 2013. Per-person cost estimates were converted to 2012 Euros and used to estimate annual national ADHD-related costs based on the Dutch 2011 census, ADHD prevalence rates, family composition, and employment rates. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. The average total ADHD-related costs ranged from €9,860 to 14,483 per patient and annual national costs were between €1,041 and €1,529 million (M). The largest cost category was education (€648 M), representing 62 and 42 % of the low- and high-value overall national estimates, respectively. By comparison, ADHD patient healthcare costs ranged between €84 M (8 %) and €377 M (25 %), and social services costs were €4.3 M (0.3-0.4 %). While the majority of the costs were incurred by ADHD patients themselves, €161 M (11-15 %) was healthcare costs to family members that were attributable to having an ADHD child/adolescent. In addition, productivity losses of family members were €143-€339 M (14-22 %). Despite uncertainties because of the small number of studies identified and the wide range in the national cost estimates, our results suggest that ADHD imposes a significant economic burden on multiple public sectors in Europe. The limited number of European-based studies examining the economic burden of ADHD highlights the need for more research in this area.

Increased risk for irritable bowel syndrome after acute diverticulitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Individuals with diverticulosis frequently also have irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but there are no longitudinal data to associate acute diverticulitis with subsequent IBS, functional bowel disorders, or related emotional distress. In patients with postinfectious IBS, gastrointestinal disorders cause long-term symptoms, so we investigated whether diverticulitis might lead to IBS. We compared the incidence of IBS and functional bowel and related affective disorders among patients with diverticulitis. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients followed up for an average of 6.3 years at a Veteran's Administration medical center. Patients with diverticulitis were identified based on International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision codes, selected for the analysis based on chart review (cases, n = 1102), and matched with patients without diverticulosis (controls, n = 1102). We excluded patients with prior IBS, functional bowel, or mood disorders. We then identified patients who were diagnosed with IBS or functional bowel disorders after the diverticulitis attack, and controls who developed these disorders during the study period. We also collected information on mood disorders, analyzed survival times, and calculated adjusted hazard ratios. RESULTS: Cases were 4.7-fold more likely to be diagnosed later with IBS (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-14.0; P = .006), 2.4-fold more likely to be diagnosed later with a functional bowel disorder (95% CI, 1.6-3.6; P < .001), and 2.2-fold more likely to develop a mood disorder (CI, 1.4-3.5; P < .001) than controls. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with diverticulitis could be at risk for later development of IBS and functional bowel disorders. We propose calling this disorder postdiverticulitis IBS. Diverticulitis appears to predispose patients to long-term gastrointestinal and emotional symptoms after resolution of inflammation; in this way, postdiverticulitis IBS is similar to postinfectious IBS.

Long-term risk of acute diverticulitis among patients with incidental diverticulosis found during colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colonic diverticulosis is the most common finding during routine colonoscopy, and patients often question the significance of these lesions. Guidelines state that these patients have a 10% to 25% lifetime risk of developing acute diverticulitis. However, this value was determined based on limited data, collected before population-based colonoscopy, so the true number of cases of diverticulosis was not known. We measured the long-term risk of acute diverticulitis among patients with confirmed diverticulosis discovered incidentally on colonoscopy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study using administrative and clinical data from the Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, collecting data on patients who underwent colonoscopies from January 1996 through January 2011. We identified patients diagnosed with diverticulosis, determined incidence rates per 1000 patient-years, and analyzed a subgroup of patients with rigorously defined events confirmed by imaging or surgery. We used a Cox proportional hazards model to identify factors associated with the development of diverticulitis. RESULTS: We identified 2222 patients with baseline diverticulosis. Over an 11-year follow-up period, 95 patients developed diverticulitis (4.3%; 6 per 1000 patient-years); of these, 23 met the rigorous definition of diverticulitis (1%; 1.5 per 1000 patient-years). The median time-to-event was 7.1 years. Each additional decade of age at time of diagnosis reduced the risk for diverticulitis by 24% (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.6-0.9). CONCLUSIONS: Based on a study of the Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, only about 4% of patients with diverticulosis develop acute diverticulitis, contradicting the common belief that diverticulosis has a high rate of progression. We also found that younger patients have a higher risk of diverticulitis, with risk increasing per year of life. These results can help inform patients with diverticulosis about their risk of developing acute diverticulitis.

Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons: a new tool for timely comparative effectiveness research.

OBJECTIVE: In the absence of head-to-head randomized trials, indirect comparisons of treatments across separate trials can be performed. However, these analyses may be biased by cross-trial differences in patient populations, sensitivity to modeling assumptions, and differences in the definitions of outcome measures. The objective of this study was to demonstrate how incorporating individual patient data (IPD) from trials of one treatment into indirect comparisons can address several limitations that arise in analyses based only on aggregate data. METHODS: Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) use IPD from trials of one treatment to match baseline summary statistics reported from trials of another treatment. After matching, by using an approach similar to propensity score weighting, treatment outcomes are compared across balanced trial populations. This method is illustrated by reviewing published MAICs in different therapeutic areas. A novel analysis in attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder further demonstrates the applicability of the method. The strengths and limitations of MAICs are discussed in comparison to those of indirect comparisons that use only published aggregate data. RESULTS: Example applications were selected to illustrate how indirect comparisons based only on aggregate data can be limited by cross-trial differences in patient populations, differences in the definitions of outcome measures, and sensitivity to modeling assumptions. The use of IPD and MAIC is shown to address these limitations in the selected examples by reducing or removing the observed cross-trial differences. An important assumption of MAIC, as in any comparison of nonrandomized treatment groups, is that there are no unobserved cross-trial differences that could confound the comparison of outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Indirect treatment comparisons can be limited by cross-trial differences. By combining IPD with published aggregate data, MAIC can reduce observed cross-trial differences and provide decision makers with timely comparative evidence.

Comparative effectiveness research using matching-adjusted indirect comparison: an application to treatment with guanfacine extended release or atomoxetine in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and comorbid oppositional defiant disorder.

OBJECTIVES: To illustrate a matching-adjusted indirect comparison by comparing the efficacy of guanfacine extended release (GXR) and atomoxetine (ATX) in reducing oppositional symptoms in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and comorbid oppositional defiant disorder. METHODS: Individual patient data were used from a GXR trial; only published summary data were used from ATX trials. In a matching-adjusted indirect comparison, individual patients from the GXR trial were weighted such that their mean baseline characteristics matched those published for ATX trials. Placebo-arm outcomes were then compared to further assess balance between the matched populations. Changes in the Conners' Parent Rating Scale-Revised Short Form Oppositional Subscale from baseline to endpoint among GXR-treated and ATX-treated patients were then compared. RESULTS: Before matching, the GXR (n = 143) and ATX (n = 98) trial populations had significant differences in baseline characteristics and placebo-arm outcomes. After matching, baseline characteristics were well balanced across trials, and placebo-arm outcomes became nearly identical. Comparing active treatment arms across the matched populations, GXR was associated with a significantly greater reduction in mean Conners' Parent Rating Scale-Revised Short form oppositional subscale compared with ATX {-5.0 [95% confidence interval (CI): -6.6 to -3.4] vs. -2.4 [CI: -3.7 to -1.1], p = 0.01, effect size = 0.58}. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of head-to-head randomized trials, matching-adjusted indirect comparisons can provide timely and reliable comparative evidence for decision makers and can be applied even when very few trials are available for the treatments of interest.

Treatment persistence & health care costs of adult MDD patients treated with escitalopram vs. citalopram in a medicaid population.

OBJECTIVE: Compare treatment persistence and health care costs of major depressive disorder (MDD) Medicaid patients treated with escitalopram versus citalopram. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of Medicaid administrative claims data. METHODOLOGY: Analyzed administrative claims data from the Florida Medicaid program (07/2002-06/2006) for patients ages 18-64 years with 21 inpatient claim or 2 independent medical claims for MDD. Outcomes included discontinuation and switching rates and prescription drug, medical, and total health care costs, all-cause and related to mental disorder. Contingency table analysis and survival analysis were used to compare outcomes between treatment groups, using both unadjusted analysis and multivariate analysis adjusting for baseline characteristics. RESULTS: The study included 2,650 patients initiated on escitalopram and 630 patients initiated on citalopram. Patients treated with escitalopram were less likely to discontinue the index drug (63.7% vs. 68.9%, P=0.015) or to switch to another second-generation antidepressant (14.9% vs. 18.4%, P=0.029) over the six months post-index date. Patients treated with escitalopram had $1,014 lower total health care costs (P=0.032) and $519 lower health care costs related to mental disorder (P=0.023). More than half of the total cost difference was attributable to savings in inpatient hospitalizations related to mental disorder ($571, P=0.003) and to outpatient costs ($53, P<0.001). Escitalopram therapy was also associated with $736 lower medical costs related to mental disorder (P=0.009). CONCLUSION: In the Florida Medicaid program, compared to adult MDD patients initiated on citalopram, escitalopram patients have better treatment persistence and lower total health care costs due to any cause and due to mental disorder, mostly driven by lower hospitalization costs related to mental disorder.

Economic impact of therapeutic substitution of a brand selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor with an alternative generic selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor in patients with major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: To reduce pharmacy costs, managed care organizations encourage therapeutic substitution from brand to a generic product. However, little is known about whether these cost-containment strategies can also potentially lower total expenditures for payers in treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). OBJECTIVE: To compare economic outcomes of patients with MDD who were switched from a brand selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) to an alternative generic SSRI for nonmedical reasons versus patients who continued on the brand SSRI. METHODS: Adult MDD patients in the Ingenix Impact Database (2003-2007) were considered "switchers" if they received treatment with a brand SSRI and were later switched to an alternative generic SSRI for nonmedical reasons. Patients who remained on the brand SSRI (nonswitchers) were matched 1:1 with switchers. All-cause, mental health-related, and MDD-related rates of hospitalizations/emergency department (ED) visits and costs over 6 months were compared both descriptively and by using adjusted regression models. A subgroup analysis on patients who were switched from escitalopram (Lexapro) to an alternative generic SSRI was also performed. RESULTS: The study included 4449 matched pairs. Compared with nonswitchers, switchers had higher risk of all-cause, mental health-related, and MDD-related use of hospitalizations/ED visits (OR 1.15, 1.34, and 1.54, respectively; all p < 0.01) and higher risk-adjusted mental health-related and MDD-related medical costs ($219 and $222, respectively; both p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis on escitalopram showed similar results; switchers experienced higher risk of any-cause, mental health-related, and MDD-related use of hospitalizations/ED visits (OR 1.21, 1.41, and 1.53, respectively; all p < 0.01) and higher risk-adjusted MDD-related medical costs ($151; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with patients who continued on their patented SSRIs, patients who switched to a generic SSRI incurred more resource use of hospitalizations/ED visits and higher MDD-related health-care costs. The effects of therapeutic substitution should be carefully examined, because use of generic alternatives may not be a cost-saving strategy when total health-care costs are considered.

Results of a retrospective claims database analysis of differences in antidepressant treatment persistence associated with escitalopram and other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Although previous studies have found no differences in response to antidepressant pharmacotherapy between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), some recent trials suggest benefits associated with more rapid onset of action. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to compare the likelihood that patients initiating treatment with branded escitalopram, rather than with any of 3 SSRIs (ie, citalopram, fluoxetine, and paroxetine) that are available in generic or branded formulations, would continue therapy with the initial medication after 2 and 6 months. METHODS: We used propensity score-weighted logistic regression to assess the effect of antidepressant choice on the likelihood of continuing treatment, based on data from a large administrative claims database with information about US patients. We modeled the propensity to initiate treatment with escitalopram based on demographic, diagnostic, insurance, and service-use characteristics in the 6 months before treatment initiation and used the results to calculate weights for analysis of treatment continuation. The primary outcome measures were receipt of 2 prescriptions of the index drug in the first 2 months and, among those continuing at 2 months, 4 prescriptions in the first 6 months. Antidepressant choice, cost, and service-use characteristics during the treatment period were included as covariates. Patients who initiated therapy between July 2002 and April 2005 were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: Based on data for 43,921 patients, at 2 months, escitalopram initiators were more likely to have continued initial medication than those receiving the other SSRIs (66.1% vs 61.9%, respectively; P < 0.01) and less likely to have switched or augmented treatment (4.8% vs 7.6%; P < 0.01). At 6 months, escitalopramtreated patients were also more likely to have continued initial medication (47.1% vs 41.0%; P < 0.01) and less likely to have switched or augmented treatment (9.4% vs 14.4%; P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Patients initiating treatment with escitalopram were more likely to continue and less likely to switch or augment treatment at 2 and 6 months of therapy compared with those who initiated with alternative SSRIs.

Treatment persistence, healthcare utilisation and costs in adult patients with major depressive disorder: a comparison between escitalopram and other SSRI/SNRIs.

OBJECTIVE: Compare treatment persistence, healthcare utilisation and costs for patients treated with escitalopram versus other SSRI/SNRIs in a real-world setting. METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis for major depressive disorder (MDD) and at least one prescription for an SSRI or SNRI were identified from the Ingenix Impact Database (2002-2005). The baseline and study observation periods were defined as the 6 months before and after the index date (first date for an SSRI /SNRI pharmacy claim). Comparisons were made between patients initiated on escitalopram versus other SSRI/SNRIs using descriptive statistics and multivariate regressions. RESULTS: Escitalopram patients (n=10,465) had better treatment persistence compared to patients initiated on other SSRI/SNRIs (n=28,310): the hazard ratio of all discontinuation was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI]=0.94-0.99) for the escitalopram therapy (p=0.003), and the hazard ratio of switching to another second-generation antidepressant was 0.91 (95% CI=0.87-0.94) for the escitalopram therapy (p<0.001). Escitalopram patients also had fewer inpatient service and emergency room visits. Adjusted average total all-cause healthcare costs and inpatient services costs were $839 and $405 lower in the escitalopram group (both p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Escitalopram may be associated with lower healthcare utilisation and costs among adult MDD patients compared to other SSRI/SNRIs.

Caregiver perspective on pediatric attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: medication satisfaction and symptom control.

The caregiver perspective on pediatric attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) study (CAPPA) was a web-based, cross-sectional survey of caregivers of children and adolescents (6-17 years of age) with ADHD and was conducted in 10 European countries. CAPPA included caregiver assessments of global medication satisfaction, global symptom control, and satisfaction with ADHD medication attributes. Overall, 2,326 caregiver responses indicated that their child or adolescent was currently receiving ADHD medication and completed the "off medication" assessment required for inclusion in the present analyses. Responses to the single-item global medication satisfaction question indicated that 88% were satisfied (moderately satisfied to very satisfied) with current medication and 18% were "very satisfied" on the single-item question. Responses to the single-item global symptom control question indicated that 47% and 19% of caregivers considered their child or adolescent's symptoms to be "controlled" or "very well controlled", respectively. Significant variations in response to the questions of medication satisfaction and symptom control were observed between countries. The correlation between the global medication satisfaction and global symptom control questions was 0.677 (P<0.001). Global medication satisfaction was significantly correlated (P<0.001) with all assessed medication attributes, with the highest correlations observed for symptom control (r=0.601) and effect duration (r=0.449). Correlations of medication attributes with global symptom control were generally lower than with global medication satisfaction but were all statistically significant (P<0.001). CAPPA medication satisfaction and symptom control were also significantly correlated (P<0.001) with symptom control as based on the ADHD-Rating Scale-IV symptom score and the number of bad days per month when on medication. In conclusion, caregiver responses in this European sample suggest that current treatment could potentially be improved. The observed correlations of global medication satisfaction with global symptom control and other CAPPA assessments, including medication attributes, provide support for the inter-connectivity of the medication satisfaction and symptom control.