Wu Eric Q, Birnbaum Howard G, Zhang Huabin F, Ivanova Jasmina I, Yang Elaine, Mallet David
Analysis Group, Inc., Boston, MA 02199, USA.
J Manag Care Pharm. 2007 Sep;13(7):561-9. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2007.13.7.561.
Many therapies exist for treating adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), also referred to as attention-deficit disorder (ADD), but there is no research regarding cost differences associated with initiating alternative ADD/ADHD drug therapies in adults.
To compare from the perspective of a large self-insured employer the risk-adjusted direct health care costs associated with 3 alternative drug therapies for ADD in newly treated patients: extended-release methylphenidate (osmotic release oral system-MPH), mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS-XR), or atomoxetine.
We analyzed data from a US claims database of 5 million beneficiaries from 31 large self-insured employers (1999-2004). Analysis was restricted to adults aged 18 to 64 years with at least 1 diagnosis of ADD/ADHD (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] codes 314.0x--attention deficit disorder; 314.00--attention deficit disorder without hyperactivity; or 314.01--attention-deficit disorder with hyperactivity) and at least 1 pharmacy claim for OROS-MPH, MAS-XR, or atomoxetine identified using National Drug Codes. In preliminary analysis, we calculated the duration of index ADHD drug therapy as time from index therapy initiation to a minimum 60-day gap. Because the median duration of index ADHD drug therapy was found to be approximately 90 days, the primary measures were total direct medical plus drug costs and medical-only costs computed over 6 months following therapy initiation. Adults were required to have continuous eligibility 6 months before and 6 months after their latest drug therapy initiation and no ADHD therapy during the previous 6 months. Cost was measured as the payment amount made by the health plan to the provider rather than billed charges, and it excluded patient copayments and deductibles. Medical costs included costs incurred for all-cause inpatient and outpatient/other services. Costs were adjusted for inflation to 2004 U.S. dollars using the consumer price index for medical care. T tests were used for descriptive cost comparisons. Generalized linear models (GLMs) were used to compare costs of adults receiving alternative therapies, adjusting for demographic characteristics, substance abuse, depression, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index.
Of the 4,569 patients who received 1 of these 3 drug therapies for ADHD, 31.8% received OROS-MPH for a median duration of 99 days of therapy, 34.0% received MAS-XR for a median 128 days, and 34.2% received atomoxetine for a median 86 days. In the 6-month follow-up period, the mean (standard deviation) total medical and drug costs were $2,008 ($3,231) for OROS-MPH, $2,169 ($4,828) for MAS-XR, and $2,540 ($4,269) for atomoxetine-treated adults. The GLM for patient characteristics suggested that 6-month, risk-adjusted mean medical costs, excluding drug costs, for adults treated with OROS-MPH were $142 less (10.4%, $1,220 vs. $1,362) compared with MAS-XR (P =0.022) and $132 less (9.8%, $1,220 vs. $1,352) compared with atomoxetine (P =0.033); risk-adjusted mean medical costs were not significantly different between MAS-XR and atomoxetine. The GLM comparison of risk-adjusted total direct costs, including drug cost, was on average $156 less (8.0%, $1,782 vs. $1,938) for OROS-MPH compared with MAS-XR (P = 0.017) and $226 less (11.3%, $1,782 vs. $2,008) compared with atomoxetine (P <0.001); the risk-adjusted total direct costs were not significantly different between MAS-XR and atomoxetine. Two high-cost outliers (greater than 99.96th percentile, 1 each for OROS-MPH and atomoxetine) accounted for $47 (30%) of the $156 cost difference between OROS-MPH and MAS-XR and $11 (5%) of the $226 cost difference between OROS-MPH and atomoxetine, and the medical diagnoses for the highest-cost claims for these 2 outlier patients were unrelated to ADHD.
After adjusting for patient characteristics including substance abuse, depression, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index, adults treated with OROS-MPH had, on average, slightly lower medical and total medical and drug costs than those treated with MAS-XR or atomoxetine over the 6-month period after drug therapy initiation. Approximately 30% of the cost difference compared with MAS-XR was attributable to 1 high-cost outlier with medical diagnoses for the highest-cost claim that were unrelated to ADHD.
治疗成人注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD,也称为注意力缺陷障碍[ADD])的疗法众多,但尚无关于成人启动替代性ADD/ADHD药物疗法相关成本差异的研究。
从大型自保雇主的角度比较新治疗患者中三种替代性ADD药物疗法(缓释哌甲酯[渗透泵控释口服系统 - MPH]、混合安非他明盐缓释剂[MAS - XR]或托莫西汀)的风险调整后直接医疗保健成本。
我们分析了来自美国31家大型自保雇主的500万受益人的理赔数据库(1999 - 2004年)的数据。分析仅限于年龄在18至64岁、至少有1次ADD/ADHD诊断(国际疾病分类第九版临床修订本[ICD - 9 - CM]编码314.0x - 注意力缺陷障碍;314.00 - 无多动的注意力缺陷障碍;或314.01 - 伴有多动的注意力缺陷障碍)且至少有1次使用国家药品编码识别的OROS - MPH、MAS - XR或托莫西汀药房理赔记录的成年人。在初步分析中,我们将索引ADHD药物治疗的持续时间计算为从索引治疗开始到至少60天间隔的时间。由于发现索引ADHD药物治疗的中位持续时间约为90天,主要测量指标是治疗开始后6个月内计算的总直接医疗加药物成本和仅医疗成本。要求成年人在其最新药物治疗开始前6个月和开始后6个月连续参保,且在前6个月内未接受ADHD治疗。成本以健康计划向提供者支付的金额衡量,而非计费费用,且不包括患者自付费用和免赔额。医疗成本包括所有原因的住院和门诊/其他服务产生的费用。使用医疗保健消费者价格指数将成本调整为2004年美元。采用t检验进行描述性成本比较。使用广义线性模型(GLM)比较接受替代疗法的成年人的成本,并对人口统计学特征、药物滥用、抑郁症和查尔森合并症指数进行调整。
在接受这三种ADHD药物疗法之一的4569名患者中,31.8%接受OROS - MPH治疗,中位治疗持续时间为99天;34.0%接受MAS - XR治疗,中位治疗持续时间为128天;34.2%接受托莫西汀治疗,中位治疗持续时间为86天。在6个月的随访期内,接受OROS - MPH治疗的成年人的平均(标准差)总医疗和药物成本为2008美元(3231美元),接受MAS - XR治疗的为2169美元(4828美元),接受托莫西汀治疗的为2540美元(4269美元)。针对患者特征的GLM表明,接受OROS - MPH治疗的成年人,排除药物成本后的6个月风险调整后平均医疗成本比接受MAS - XR治疗的少142美元(10.4%,1220美元对1362美元)(P = 0.022),比接受托莫西汀治疗的少132美元(9.8%,1220美元对1352美元)(P = 0.033);MAS - XR和托莫西汀之间的风险调整后平均医疗成本无显著差异。包括药物成本在内的风险调整后总直接成本的GLM比较显示,与MAS - XR相比,OROS - MPH平均少156美元(8.0%,1782美元对1938美元)(P = 0.017),与托莫西汀相比少226美元(11.3%,1782美元对2008美元)(P < 0.001);MAS - XR和托莫西汀之间的风险调整后总直接成本无显著差异。两个高成本异常值(高于第99.96百分位数,OROS - MPH和托莫西汀各1个)分别占OROS - MPH与MAS - XR之间156美元成本差异的47美元(30%)和OROS - MPH与托莫西汀之间226美元成本差异的11美元(5%),这两名异常值患者的最高成本理赔的医疗诊断与ADHD无关。
在对包括药物滥用、抑郁症和查尔森合并症指数在内的患者特征进行调整后,接受OROS - MPH治疗的成年人在药物治疗开始后的6个月内,平均医疗成本以及医疗和总医疗及药物成本略低于接受MAS - XR或托莫西汀治疗的成年人。与MAS - XR相比,约30%的成本差异归因于1名高成本异常值患者,其最高成本理赔的医疗诊断与ADHD无关。