Pan Yi-Ju, Kuo Kuei-Hong, Wang Shuu-Jiun
Department of Psychiatry, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, No.21, Sec. 2, Nanya S. Road., Banciao District, New Taipei City 220, Taiwan; Centre for the Economics of Mental and Physical Health, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, King׳s College London, United Kingdom; School of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taiwan.
School of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taiwan; Division of Medical Imaging, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, Taiwan.
J Affect Disord. 2015 Jan 1;170:255-65. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2014.08.034. Epub 2014 Sep 2.
Depression and headache are highly prevalent in clinical settings. The co-occurrence of headache may impact choice of antidepressants, healthcare utilisation, and outcomes in patients with depression. The current study aims to examine the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of different antidepressants for treating patients with depression and comorbid headache disorders.
Adult patients prescribed with antidepressants for depression (n=96,501) were identified from the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan. A cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis was conducted comparing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), and by the presence of comorbid headache disorders and other pain conditions.
In this study, SSRIs dominated SNRIs in both cost-effectiveness and cost-utility. As revealed in the cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, TCAs were likely to have a cost-utility advantage compared to SSRIs and SNRIs in improving quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for patients with comorbid headache; SSRIs remained as the most cost-effective option for patients with other pain conditions.
Limitations include the use of proxy definition of remission as effectiveness measure and the adoption of utility values from previous studies.
Given a pre-determined willingness-to-pay level, TCAs can be considered as a cost-effective option to improve QALYs for depressed patients with headache disorders. Future research is needed to further clarify factors influencing the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of pharmacological treatments in depressed patients with specific pain conditions.
抑郁症和头痛在临床环境中非常普遍。头痛的并存可能会影响抗抑郁药的选择、医疗保健的利用以及抑郁症患者的治疗结果。本研究旨在探讨不同抗抑郁药治疗抑郁症合并头痛障碍患者的成本效益和成本效用。
从台湾国民健康保险研究数据库中识别出96501名因抑郁症而开具抗抑郁药的成年患者。进行了成本效益和成本效用分析,比较了选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRIs)、5-羟色胺去甲肾上腺素再摄取抑制剂(SNRIs)和三环类抗抑郁药(TCAs),并根据是否存在合并头痛障碍和其他疼痛状况进行分析。
在本研究中,SSRIs在成本效益和成本效用方面均优于SNRIs。成本效益可接受性曲线显示,与SSRIs和SNRIs相比,TCAs在改善合并头痛患者的质量调整生命年(QALYs)方面可能具有成本效用优势;对于患有其他疼痛状况的患者,SSRIs仍然是最具成本效益的选择。
局限性包括使用缓解的替代定义作为有效性衡量标准以及采用先前研究中的效用值。
在预先确定的支付意愿水平下,TCAs可被视为改善头痛障碍抑郁症患者QALYs的具有成本效益的选择。未来需要进一步研究,以进一步阐明影响特定疼痛状况抑郁症患者药物治疗成本效益和成本效用的因素。