Does Non-Adherence Increase Treatment Costs in Schizophrenia?

The impact of COVID-19 public health measures on the utilization of antipsychotics in schizophrenia in Manitoba - A population-based study

PURPOSE

During the COVID-19 pandemic, public health measures were implemented, yet it is unknown whether these measures affected medication access in those with schizophrenia (SCZ). This study aimed to assess whether the antipsychotic utilization in SCZ changed during the pandemic.

METHODS

We used dispensed prescription drug data from the Canadian province of Manitoba in individuals with SCZ using linked administrative data from the Manitoba Population Research Data Repository. The quarterly incident and prevalent dispensation of antipsychotics at two periods were compared with the expected trend (April 1, 2015 to April 1, 2020 and 2021) using linear autoregression. We stratified the primary results by age and sex and examined multiple subgroups.

RESULTS

There were 9045 individuals with SCZ in the first fiscal quarter of 2020. The prevalent use of the most common antipsychotics were: olanzapine (206.7/1000), risperidone (190.8/1000), quetiapine (174.4/1000), and clozapine (100.9/1000). The overall prevalent use of antipsychotics remained stable during the pandemic compared with the expected trend. A significant decrease in the incident use in April-June 2020 (estimate: -1.3, 95%CI:-2.2,-0.3) was noted compared with the expected. A significantly higher incidence of atypical antipsychotics (estimate: 1.4, 95%CI: 0.2,2.5) and risperidone separately (estimate: 1.8, 95%CI: 0.2,3.3) was noted in 2021 compared with expected.

CONCLUSION

This study found a decline in the receipt of antipsychotics for people with SCZ during the initial implementation of COVID-19 public health measures, particularly on the overall incidence. Future work on investigating the impact of these trends on SCZ outcomes is needed to inform future pandemic-related policies.

Healthcare utilisation and costs associated with adherence to antipsychotics among people living with HIV/AIDS and schizophrenia: a population-based cohort study in British Columbia, Canada

OBJECTIVES

Non-adherence to antipsychotics is the greatest obstacle to treating schizophrenia. We assessed the economic and clinical impacts of adherence to antipsychotics among people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWH) and schizophrenia in British Columbia, Canada.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A population-based cohort study in British Columbia, Canada.

METHODS

Eligible PLWH were enrolled in the Seek and Treat for Optimal Prevention HIV/AIDS population-based cohort during 2001-2016, diagnosed with schizophrenia, on antipsychotics for ≥1 day, and followed for ≥1 year from schizophrenia diagnosis date or 1 January 2001, whichever occurred last.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

A two-part model assessed the marginal effect of adherence on healthcare costs (in 2016 Canadian dollar), while logistic regression examined the effect on virological failure, and generalised linear mixed models examined the effect on hospital readmissions within 30 days and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Among 726 PLWH with schizophrenia, ≥80% adherence to antipsychotics increased from 25% (50/198) in 2001 to 41% (225/554) in 2016. In most years, we observed no difference in adherence to antipsychotics among those who used only injectables, only non-injectables, and a combination of both, or among those who have ever consumed typical/first-generation antipsychotics and who consumed only atypical/second-generation antipsychotics. Overall healthcare costs were higher in the non-adherent group ($C2185), driven by the average annual hospitalisation costs ($C5517), particularly among women ($C8806) and people who ever injected drugs (PWID) ($C5985). Non-adherent individuals also experienced higher hospital readmissions (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.48, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.77), and longer hospital stays (adjusted mean ratio 1.23, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.35) in comparison to adherent individuals. We found no difference in virological failure by adherence groups, except when we stratified by gender where the aOR for women was 2.48 (95% CI 1.06 to 5.82).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results showed that implementing strategies and interventions to increase antipsychotic adherence, particularly among women and PWID, will be critical in addressing this public health challenge.

Economic burden in Medicaid beneficiaries with recently relapsed schizophrenia or with uncontrolled symptoms of schizophrenia not adherent to antipsychotics

BACKGROUND: Patients with schizophrenia struggle with disease relapses and uncontrolled symptoms, which can either result in or be a result of non-adherence to antipsychotics (APs). The economic burden of such patients is hypothesized to be substantial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the economic burden of recently relapsed schizophrenia or of uncontrolled symptoms of schizophrenia with non-adherence to APs in Medicaid beneficiaries. METHODS: Adults with ≥ 2 schizophrenia diagnoses and controls without schizophrenia were identified in Medicaid data (1997Q1-2018Q1) from Iowa, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, and Wisconsin. The index date was the last observed schizophrenia diagnosis (cohort with schizophrenia) or the last service claim (control cohort) with ≥ 12 months of continuous Medicaid enrollment before and after it. Cohorts were matched 1:1 using propensity scores. After matching, two subgroups were identified among adults with schizophrenia: (1) patients with schizophrenia and a recent relapse (≥ 1 schizophrenia-related inpatient or emergency department claim ≤ 60 days before or on the index date) and (2) patients with uncontrolled symptoms of schizophrenia (≥ 2 schizophrenia-related hospitalizations) and non-adherence to APs (proportion of days covered < 80%) in the 12-month pre-index period. Previously matched controls were then subset to patients in each subgroup and their matched pairs without schizophrenia, thus maintaining the 1:1 matching ratio. Healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs ($2018 USD) in the 12-month post-index (observation) period were compared between matched pairs using adjusted regression models. RESULTS: Among 158,763 patients with schizophrenia, 18,771 (11.8%) had a recent relapse (mean age 50.5 years; 48.6% female, 51.4% male) and 13,697 (8.6%) were not adherent to APs and had uncontrolled symptoms of schizophrenia (mean age 47.1 years; 48.0% female, 52.0% male). During the observation period, patients with recently relapsed schizophrenia and those non-adherent to APs with uncontrolled symptoms of schizophrenia had significantly higher HRU relative to their controls without schizophrenia. Patients with recently relapsed schizophrenia had mean total healthcare costs $21,862 higher relative to their controls ($37,424 vs $15,563), driven by $8,486 higher mean long-term care costs (all P < 0.001). Patients non-adherent to APs with uncontrolled symptoms of schizophrenia had adjusted mean total healthcare costs $20,787 higher relative to their controls ($38,337 vs $15,241), driven by $8,019 higher adjusted mean inpatient costs (all P < 0.001). Additional total healthcare costs incurred by patients with recently relapsed schizophrenia and those of patients non-adherent to APs with uncontrolled symptoms of schizophrenia exceeded by 55.2% and 47.6%, respectively, incremental total healthcare costs incurred by all patients with schizophrenia ($14,087). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with recently relapsed schizophrenia and those non-adherent to AP therapy with uncontrolled symptoms of schizophrenia incurred higher HRU and costs relative to patients without schizophrenia. Additional healthcare costs of these subgroups of patients with schizophrenia appeared higher than in the overall population with schizophrenia. DISCLOSURES: This study was supported by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. The sponsor was involved in the study design, data collection, data analysis, manuscript preparation, and publication decisions. Pilon, Lafeuille, Zhdanava, Côté-Sergent, Rossi, and Lefebvre are employees of Analysis Group, Inc., a consulting company that has provided paid consulting services to Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, which funded the development and conduct of this study and manuscript. Patel, Joshi, and Lin are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC and stockholders of Johnson & Johnson. Part of the material in this manuscript has been presented at the US Psych Congress, October 3-6, 2019, San Diego, CA, and at the Virtual ISPOR Meeting, May 18-20, 2020.

Transitioning from oral risperidone or paliperidone to once-monthly paliperidone palmitate: a real-world analysis among Veterans Health Administration patients with schizophrenia who have had at least one prior hospitalization

Objective: To address gaps in the literature on healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs among patients with schizophrenia and prior hospitalization who transition from oral risperidone or paliperidone (oral ris/pali) to once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M) in a real-world setting by comparing treatment patterns, HRU, and costs 12-months pre- and post-transition to PP1M among Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients affected by schizophrenia who have had ≥1 hospitalization.Methods: VHA patients with schizophrenia (aged ≥18 years) who initiated oral ris/pali, had ≥1 all-cause inpatient stay, and transitioned to PP1M from January 2015-March 2017 were included from the VHA database. The first transition date to PP1M was identified as the index date. Patients were required to have continuous health plan eligibility for 12 months pre- and post-PP1M. Outcomes were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank and McNemar's test, as appropriate.Results: The study included 319 patients (mean [SD] age = 51.6 [4.2] years) during 12 months of baseline and follow-up. During pre-PP1M transition, 7.2% of the patients were adherent (proportion of days covered [PDC] ≥ 80%) to oral ris/pali. Post-PP1M transition, 27.6% of the patients were adherent to PP1M. Comparison of HRU outcomes from the pre- to post-PP1M transition revealed significantly lower all-cause inpatient stays (3.5 vs 1.4, p < .0001) and shorter inpatient length of stay (43.4 vs 18.3 days, p < .0001). Similar trends were seen for mental health and schizophrenia-related HRU. Cost outcome comparison indicated significantly lower all-cause inpatient costs ($64,702 vs $24,147, p < .0001), total medical costs ($87,917 vs $56,947, p < .0001), and total costs ($91,181 vs $69,106, p < .0001). A similar trend was observed for mental health and schizophrenia-related costs.Conclusions: Transitioning from oral ris/pali to PP1M may significantly improve HRU and provide potential cost savings in VHA patients with schizophrenia and ≥1 prior hospitalization.

Rising co-payments coincide with unwanted effects on continuity of healthcare for patients with schizophrenia in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Co-payments, used to control rising costs of healthcare, may lead to disruption of appropriate outpatient care and to increases in acute crisis treatment or hospital admission in patients with schizophrenia. An abrupt rise in co-payments in 2012 in the Netherlands offered a natural experiment to study the effects of co-payments on continuity of healthcare in schizophrenia.

METHODS

Retrospective longitudinal registry-based cohort study. Outcome measures were (i) continuity of elective (planned) psychiatric care (outpatient care and/or antipsychotic medication); (ii) acute psychiatric care (crisis treatment and hospital admission); and (iii) somatic care per quarter of the years 2009-2014.

RESULTS

10 911 patients with schizophrenia were included. During the six-year follow-up period the level of elective psychiatric outpatient care (-20%); and acute psychiatric care (-37%) decreased. Treatment restricted to antipsychotic medication (without concurrent outpatient psychiatric care) increased (67%). The use of somatic care also increased (24%). Use of acute psychiatric care was highest in quarters when only antipsychotic medication was received. The majority (59%) of patients received continuous elective psychiatric care in 2009-2014. Patients receiving continuous care needed only half the acute psychiatric care needed by patients not in continuous care. On top of these trends time series analysis (ARIMA) showed that the abrupt rise in co-payments from 2012 onwards coincided with significant increases in stand-alone treatment with antipsychotic medication and acute psychiatric care.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of psychiatric care decreased substantially among a cohort of patients with schizophrenia. The high rise in co-payments from 2012 onwards coincided with significant increases in stand-alone treatment with antipsychotic medication and acute psychiatric care.