Cramer Joyce A, Wang Zhixiao J, Chang Eunice, Copher Ronda, Cherepanov Dasha, Broder Michael S
49 Briar Hollow Lane, #1804, Houston, TX 77027, USA.
Eisai, Inc., 100 Tice Boulevard, Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677, USA.
Epilepsy Behav. 2015 Mar;44:40-6. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2014.12.020. Epub 2015 Jan 27.
This study aimed to compare health-care utilization and costs in patients treated with long-acting (LA) vs. short-acting (SA) antiepileptic drug (AED) monotherapy.
We conducted a cross-sectional study of claims from the OptumInsight™ database. Our analysis was restricted to adults diagnosed with epilepsy and who used AED monotherapy. Patients were excluded if they used >1 type of AED, had <9months of treatment, or had a treatment gap of >60days. Antiepileptic drugs were classified as LA or SA based on published data and expert opinion. Medical and pharmacy claims were used to estimate health-care utilization and costs, and baseline group differences were adjusted using multivariate analyses.
There were 4058 (49.6%) LA AED users and 4122 (50.4%) SA AED users. Medication possession ratios (MPRs) were not significantly different between LA AED users and SA AED users (P=0.125). Long-acting AED users had lower mean overall health-care costs ($9757 vs. $12,689), lower epilepsy-related costs ($3539 vs. $5279), and lower rate of overall (8.8% vs. 10.9%) and epilepsy-related hospitalizations (5.7% vs. 7.6%) compared with SA AED users (all P<0.01). After adjusting for demographics and clinical characteristics, mean overall costs were lower by $686 and the mean epilepsy-related costs were lower by $894 in LA AED users.
Although MPRs were similar in LA AED and SA AED groups, patients treated with LA monotherapy had a lower economic burden compared with those treated with SA monotherapy, indicating that using AEDs with extended duration of action is associated with decreased health-care use and lower health-care costs.
本研究旨在比较接受长效(LA)与短效(SA)抗癫痫药物(AED)单药治疗的患者的医疗保健利用率和费用。
我们对OptumInsight™数据库中的索赔数据进行了横断面研究。我们的分析仅限于诊断为癫痫且使用AED单药治疗的成年人。如果患者使用超过1种类型的AED、治疗时间少于9个月或治疗间隔超过60天,则将其排除。根据已发表的数据和专家意见,将抗癫痫药物分为长效或短效。使用医疗和药房索赔数据来估计医疗保健利用率和费用,并使用多变量分析对基线组差异进行调整。
有4058名(49.6%)长效AED使用者和4122名(50.4%)短效AED使用者。长效AED使用者和短效AED使用者之间的药物持有率(MPR)无显著差异(P=0.125)。与短效AED使用者相比,长效AED使用者的平均总体医疗保健费用较低(9757美元对12,689美元),癫痫相关费用较低(3539美元对5279美元),总体住院率(8.8%对10.9%)和癫痫相关住院率(5.7%对7.6%)也较低(所有P<0.01)。在调整人口统计学和临床特征后,长效AED使用者的平均总体费用降低了686美元,平均癫痫相关费用降低了894美元。
尽管长效AED组和短效AED组的MPR相似,但与接受短效单药治疗的患者相比,接受长效单药治疗的患者经济负担较低,这表明使用作用持续时间延长的AED与减少医疗保健使用和降低医疗保健费用相关。