Lachaine Jean, Ben Amor Leila, Pringsheim Tamara, Burns James, van Stralen Judy
Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Department of Psychiatry, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2019 Dec;29(10):730-739. doi: 10.1089/cap.2019.0097. Epub 2019 Sep 17.
To assess treatment patterns, health care resource utilization, and health care costs associated with use of atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) or the nonstimulant guanfacine extended release (GXR) after stimulant therapy for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). In Canada, GXR is approved as a monotherapy for children and adolescents with ADHD or as an adjunct to stimulants, and AAPs are commonly used off-label as an adjunct to stimulants. Health care claims data (January 1, 2007 to March 31, 2016) from Quebec's provincial health plan were assessed for individuals with ADHD, 6-17 years of age, who received ≥1 stimulant followed by a first AAP or GXR prescription (index medication), without a diagnosis for which AAPs are indicated. Overall, 1327 individuals were included (AAPs, 1098; GXR, 229). Rates of discontinuation, augmentation, or switching of the index medication did not differ between AAPs and GXR during the first follow-up year. Discontinuation rates were significantly lower with GXR than with AAPs during the second year (22.0% vs. 35.9%; = 0.03). GXR and AAPs resulted in similar increases in total health care cost. In GXR users, the increase in prescription drug cost after 6 months was higher than in AAP users, whereas the increase in overall medical cost was higher with AAPs than GXR, owing to more psychiatric department visits. In children and adolescents with ADHD who used AAPs or GXR after stimulants, secondary treatment changes were similar with both treatments after 1 year, but discontinuation rates were significantly lower with GXR than with AAPs in the second year. The greater increase in prescription cost with GXR was balanced by a greater increase in overall medical costs with AAPs, resulting in no overall difference in total health care cost between the two treatments.
评估在注意力缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)的兴奋剂治疗后使用非典型抗精神病药物(AAPs)或非刺激性缓释胍法辛(GXR)的治疗模式、医疗保健资源利用情况以及医疗保健成本。在加拿大,GXR被批准作为患有ADHD的儿童和青少年的单一疗法或作为兴奋剂的辅助药物,而AAPs通常作为兴奋剂的辅助药物在标签外使用。对来自魁北克省省级医疗计划的医疗保健索赔数据(2007年1月1日至2016年3月31日)进行了评估,这些数据涉及6至17岁患有ADHD且接受了≥1次兴奋剂治疗后首次开具AAP或GXR处方(索引药物)且无AAPs适用诊断的个体。总体而言,纳入了1327名个体(AAPs组1098名;GXR组229名)。在首次随访年期间,AAPs组和GXR组索引药物的停药、增加剂量或换药率没有差异。在第二年,GXR组的停药率显著低于AAPs组(22.0%对35.9%;P = 0.03)。GXR和AAPs导致的总医疗保健成本增加相似。在GXR使用者中,6个月后处方药成本的增加高于AAP使用者,而由于更多的精神科就诊,AAPs组的总体医疗成本增加高于GXR组。在兴奋剂治疗后使用AAPs或GXR的ADHD儿童和青少年中,两种治疗1年后的二级治疗变化相似,但第二年GXR组的停药率显著低于AAPs组。GXR组处方成本的较大增加被AAPs组总体医疗成本的较大增加所平衡,导致两种治疗之间的总医疗保健成本没有总体差异。