The impact of schizophrenic patient functionality on service utilization and cost. Based on a presentation by Sandra L. Tunis, PhD.
With the advent of atypical agents in the treatment of schizophrenia, physicians and policy makers must consider the costs that may accompany greater clinical efficacy. Analyses reveal that olanzapine shows a greater clinical cost effectiveness, as well as a greater functional cost effectiveness, than haloperidol, and that functional outcomes, in particular, show promise as important measures of effectiveness. Functional outcomes can help differentiate medications and can be used to help demonstrate the cost effectiveness of atypical agents. Mental health and physical health functioning, as well as work status, are all measures of functioning that have been used to evaluate treatment strategies. When comparing olanzapine with haloperidol, cost savings are seen throughout the treatment period (1 year), with physical functioning most highly affected over time. Functional outcomes can therefore serve 2 purposes: to enhance compliance by improving health-related quality of life and to assist in making both treatment and formulary decisions.
D014150:Antipsychotic Agents / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D001569:Benzodiazepines; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D006220:Haloperidol / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D017721:Hospital Costs; D006801:Humans; D000077152:Olanzapine; D010890:Pirenzepine / Q000031:analogs & derivatives* / Q000191:economics / Q000627:therapeutic use; D011788:Quality of Life; D012559:Schizophrenia / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000191:economics*; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014481:United States
D014150:Antipsychotic Agents; D001569:Benzodiazepines; D010890:Pirenzepine; D006220:Haloperidol; D000077152:Olanzapine