Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of The Paliperidone Palmitate 3-Month Formulation Versus 1-Month Formulation From A Healthcare Payer Perspective

OBJECTIVES: Schizophrenic episodes cause socio-economic problems and compliance with therapy is a known problem for schizophrenia patients and their families.The 3-monthly paliperidone palmitate formulation(PP3M) offers long-term benefits for patients by preventing schizophrenic episodes,also reduci...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Value in health 2017-10, Vol.20 (9), p.A713
Hauptverfasser: Arikan, Y, Koral, S, Baris, H, Malhan, S, Oksuz, E
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 9
container_start_page A713
container_title Value in health
container_volume 20
creator Arikan, Y
Koral, S
Baris, H
Malhan, S
Oksuz, E
description OBJECTIVES: Schizophrenic episodes cause socio-economic problems and compliance with therapy is a known problem for schizophrenia patients and their families.The 3-monthly paliperidone palmitate formulation(PP3M) offers long-term benefits for patients by preventing schizophrenic episodes,also reducing the partial compliance risk.This study aims to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of PP3M in the Turkish healthcare system.using the once-monthly paliperidone palmitate treatment(PPlM) as the comparison agent. METHODS: The cost-of-illness methodology has been used in calculation of the cost data in Tlirkey. The analysis has been performed retrospectively in a one-year time horizon and from the healthcare payer perspective.Quality-Adjusted Life Year(QALY) caused by the difference in the administration of the two treatments,three-monthly and monthly injections,have been considered as the effectiveness value.American dollars were used as the currency unit based on the purchasing power parity(PPP) ($l=1.31TL-OECD 2016). RESULTS: The annual mean cost per schizophrenia patient has been calculated at 6330.2 PPP-$ for treatment with PP1M and at 6006.8 PPP-$ for the treatment with PP3M.For PPlM,drug treatment cost.which consists of antipsychotic drugs used in practice.accounts for 83.7% of the total cost.while outpatient follow-up cost is the second significant cost component at 9.8%.Service and intervention costs comprise 5.7% of the total cost.For PP3M,drug treatment costs.which consist of antipsychotics used in practice.comprises 83.8% of the total cost,while outpatient follow-up cost ranks the second significant cost component at 10.3%.Service and intervention cost accounts for 5.1% of the total cost.Considering the QALY values (0.65-PP1M versus 0.70-PP3M),PP3M treatment has been found to be dominant compared to maintenance therapy with PPlM.(per QALY -6468.0 PPP-$) CONCLUSIONS: PP3M addresses unmet needs expected by new treatments due to several positive characteristics such as reduction of the treatment discontinuation risk,prevention of relapses,reduction in Healthcare Resource Use related to hospitalization.Therefore,PP3M has been determined to be cost-saving health technology by lowering the costs of hospitalization.drug treatment.adverse event and outpatient clinic.compared to maintenance schizophrenia therapy with PP1M.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jval.2017.08.1890
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2113726120</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2113726120</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1670-32d591ddab6cacce8849c5d62d57c2f13fb9062f698d47132ebc81d7b0c9b7a93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkE1OwzAQhSMEEqVwAjaWWCd47MROllXVUqQiuihsLcex1URJXGynUu_AoUkoS1bz9-aN5ouiR8AJYGDPTdKcZJsQDDzBeQJ5ga-iGWQkjVNO6fWY4yKPKYbsNrrzvsEYM0qyWfS9tD7EK2O0CvVJ99p7tOhle_a1R9ag_UGjnWzro3Z1ZfvfoquDDBrR-M324YDW1nVDK0Nte_SpnR88gn9Ga2c7tEAbLdtwUNJNVmft0G5cOV6u30c3RrZeP_zFefSxXu2Xm3j7_vK6XGxjBYzjmJIqK6CqZMmUVErneVqorGJjmytigJqywIwYVuRVyoESXaocKl5iVZRcFnQePV18j85-DdoH0djBjV97QQAoJwwIHlX0olLOeu-0EUdXd9KdBWAxYReNmLCLCbvAuZiw0x_1tXk6</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2113726120</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of The Paliperidone Palmitate 3-Month Formulation Versus 1-Month Formulation From A Healthcare Payer Perspective</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Arikan, Y ; Koral, S ; Baris, H ; Malhan, S ; Oksuz, E</creator><creatorcontrib>Arikan, Y ; Koral, S ; Baris, H ; Malhan, S ; Oksuz, E</creatorcontrib><description>OBJECTIVES: Schizophrenic episodes cause socio-economic problems and compliance with therapy is a known problem for schizophrenia patients and their families.The 3-monthly paliperidone palmitate formulation(PP3M) offers long-term benefits for patients by preventing schizophrenic episodes,also reducing the partial compliance risk.This study aims to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of PP3M in the Turkish healthcare system.using the once-monthly paliperidone palmitate treatment(PPlM) as the comparison agent. METHODS: The cost-of-illness methodology has been used in calculation of the cost data in Tlirkey. The analysis has been performed retrospectively in a one-year time horizon and from the healthcare payer perspective.Quality-Adjusted Life Year(QALY) caused by the difference in the administration of the two treatments,three-monthly and monthly injections,have been considered as the effectiveness value.American dollars were used as the currency unit based on the purchasing power parity(PPP) ($l=1.31TL-OECD 2016). RESULTS: The annual mean cost per schizophrenia patient has been calculated at 6330.2 PPP-$ for treatment with PP1M and at 6006.8 PPP-$ for the treatment with PP3M.For PPlM,drug treatment cost.which consists of antipsychotic drugs used in practice.accounts for 83.7% of the total cost.while outpatient follow-up cost is the second significant cost component at 9.8%.Service and intervention costs comprise 5.7% of the total cost.For PP3M,drug treatment costs.which consist of antipsychotics used in practice.comprises 83.8% of the total cost,while outpatient follow-up cost ranks the second significant cost component at 10.3%.Service and intervention cost accounts for 5.1% of the total cost.Considering the QALY values (0.65-PP1M versus 0.70-PP3M),PP3M treatment has been found to be dominant compared to maintenance therapy with PPlM.(per QALY -6468.0 PPP-$) CONCLUSIONS: PP3M addresses unmet needs expected by new treatments due to several positive characteristics such as reduction of the treatment discontinuation risk,prevention of relapses,reduction in Healthcare Resource Use related to hospitalization.Therefore,PP3M has been determined to be cost-saving health technology by lowering the costs of hospitalization.drug treatment.adverse event and outpatient clinic.compared to maintenance schizophrenia therapy with PP1M.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1098-3015</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1524-4733</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.08.1890</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Lawrenceville: Elsevier Science Ltd</publisher><subject>Accounts ; Antipsychotics ; Compliance ; Cost analysis ; Critical incidents ; Data processing ; Discontinued ; Drug abuse ; Economic problems ; Health care expenditures ; Hospitalization ; Intervention ; Medical technology ; Medical treatment ; Mental disorders ; Money ; Outpatient treatment ; Palmitic acid ; Patients ; Purchasing power parity ; Quality adjusted life years ; Risk reduction ; Schizophrenia ; Socioeconomic factors</subject><ispartof>Value in health, 2017-10, Vol.20 (9), p.A713</ispartof><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Ltd. Oct/Nov 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1670-32d591ddab6cacce8849c5d62d57c2f13fb9062f698d47132ebc81d7b0c9b7a93</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,30999</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Arikan, Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koral, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baris, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malhan, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oksuz, E</creatorcontrib><title>Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of The Paliperidone Palmitate 3-Month Formulation Versus 1-Month Formulation From A Healthcare Payer Perspective</title><title>Value in health</title><description>OBJECTIVES: Schizophrenic episodes cause socio-economic problems and compliance with therapy is a known problem for schizophrenia patients and their families.The 3-monthly paliperidone palmitate formulation(PP3M) offers long-term benefits for patients by preventing schizophrenic episodes,also reducing the partial compliance risk.This study aims to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of PP3M in the Turkish healthcare system.using the once-monthly paliperidone palmitate treatment(PPlM) as the comparison agent. METHODS: The cost-of-illness methodology has been used in calculation of the cost data in Tlirkey. The analysis has been performed retrospectively in a one-year time horizon and from the healthcare payer perspective.Quality-Adjusted Life Year(QALY) caused by the difference in the administration of the two treatments,three-monthly and monthly injections,have been considered as the effectiveness value.American dollars were used as the currency unit based on the purchasing power parity(PPP) ($l=1.31TL-OECD 2016). RESULTS: The annual mean cost per schizophrenia patient has been calculated at 6330.2 PPP-$ for treatment with PP1M and at 6006.8 PPP-$ for the treatment with PP3M.For PPlM,drug treatment cost.which consists of antipsychotic drugs used in practice.accounts for 83.7% of the total cost.while outpatient follow-up cost is the second significant cost component at 9.8%.Service and intervention costs comprise 5.7% of the total cost.For PP3M,drug treatment costs.which consist of antipsychotics used in practice.comprises 83.8% of the total cost,while outpatient follow-up cost ranks the second significant cost component at 10.3%.Service and intervention cost accounts for 5.1% of the total cost.Considering the QALY values (0.65-PP1M versus 0.70-PP3M),PP3M treatment has been found to be dominant compared to maintenance therapy with PPlM.(per QALY -6468.0 PPP-$) CONCLUSIONS: PP3M addresses unmet needs expected by new treatments due to several positive characteristics such as reduction of the treatment discontinuation risk,prevention of relapses,reduction in Healthcare Resource Use related to hospitalization.Therefore,PP3M has been determined to be cost-saving health technology by lowering the costs of hospitalization.drug treatment.adverse event and outpatient clinic.compared to maintenance schizophrenia therapy with PP1M.</description><subject>Accounts</subject><subject>Antipsychotics</subject><subject>Compliance</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>Critical incidents</subject><subject>Data processing</subject><subject>Discontinued</subject><subject>Drug abuse</subject><subject>Economic problems</subject><subject>Health care expenditures</subject><subject>Hospitalization</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Medical technology</subject><subject>Medical treatment</subject><subject>Mental disorders</subject><subject>Money</subject><subject>Outpatient treatment</subject><subject>Palmitic acid</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Purchasing power parity</subject><subject>Quality adjusted life years</subject><subject>Risk reduction</subject><subject>Schizophrenia</subject><subject>Socioeconomic factors</subject><issn>1098-3015</issn><issn>1524-4733</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNptkE1OwzAQhSMEEqVwAjaWWCd47MROllXVUqQiuihsLcex1URJXGynUu_AoUkoS1bz9-aN5ouiR8AJYGDPTdKcZJsQDDzBeQJ5ga-iGWQkjVNO6fWY4yKPKYbsNrrzvsEYM0qyWfS9tD7EK2O0CvVJ99p7tOhle_a1R9ag_UGjnWzro3Z1ZfvfoquDDBrR-M324YDW1nVDK0Nte_SpnR88gn9Ga2c7tEAbLdtwUNJNVmft0G5cOV6u30c3RrZeP_zFefSxXu2Xm3j7_vK6XGxjBYzjmJIqK6CqZMmUVErneVqorGJjmytigJqywIwYVuRVyoESXaocKl5iVZRcFnQePV18j85-DdoH0djBjV97QQAoJwwIHlX0olLOeu-0EUdXd9KdBWAxYReNmLCLCbvAuZiw0x_1tXk6</recordid><startdate>201710</startdate><enddate>201710</enddate><creator>Arikan, Y</creator><creator>Koral, S</creator><creator>Baris, H</creator><creator>Malhan, S</creator><creator>Oksuz, E</creator><general>Elsevier Science Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201710</creationdate><title>Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of The Paliperidone Palmitate 3-Month Formulation Versus 1-Month Formulation From A Healthcare Payer Perspective</title><author>Arikan, Y ; Koral, S ; Baris, H ; Malhan, S ; Oksuz, E</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1670-32d591ddab6cacce8849c5d62d57c2f13fb9062f698d47132ebc81d7b0c9b7a93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Accounts</topic><topic>Antipsychotics</topic><topic>Compliance</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>Critical incidents</topic><topic>Data processing</topic><topic>Discontinued</topic><topic>Drug abuse</topic><topic>Economic problems</topic><topic>Health care expenditures</topic><topic>Hospitalization</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Medical technology</topic><topic>Medical treatment</topic><topic>Mental disorders</topic><topic>Money</topic><topic>Outpatient treatment</topic><topic>Palmitic acid</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Purchasing power parity</topic><topic>Quality adjusted life years</topic><topic>Risk reduction</topic><topic>Schizophrenia</topic><topic>Socioeconomic factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Arikan, Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koral, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baris, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malhan, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oksuz, E</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><jtitle>Value in health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Arikan, Y</au><au>Koral, S</au><au>Baris, H</au><au>Malhan, S</au><au>Oksuz, E</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of The Paliperidone Palmitate 3-Month Formulation Versus 1-Month Formulation From A Healthcare Payer Perspective</atitle><jtitle>Value in health</jtitle><date>2017-10</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>A713</spage><pages>A713-</pages><issn>1098-3015</issn><eissn>1524-4733</eissn><abstract>OBJECTIVES: Schizophrenic episodes cause socio-economic problems and compliance with therapy is a known problem for schizophrenia patients and their families.The 3-monthly paliperidone palmitate formulation(PP3M) offers long-term benefits for patients by preventing schizophrenic episodes,also reducing the partial compliance risk.This study aims to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of PP3M in the Turkish healthcare system.using the once-monthly paliperidone palmitate treatment(PPlM) as the comparison agent. METHODS: The cost-of-illness methodology has been used in calculation of the cost data in Tlirkey. The analysis has been performed retrospectively in a one-year time horizon and from the healthcare payer perspective.Quality-Adjusted Life Year(QALY) caused by the difference in the administration of the two treatments,three-monthly and monthly injections,have been considered as the effectiveness value.American dollars were used as the currency unit based on the purchasing power parity(PPP) ($l=1.31TL-OECD 2016). RESULTS: The annual mean cost per schizophrenia patient has been calculated at 6330.2 PPP-$ for treatment with PP1M and at 6006.8 PPP-$ for the treatment with PP3M.For PPlM,drug treatment cost.which consists of antipsychotic drugs used in practice.accounts for 83.7% of the total cost.while outpatient follow-up cost is the second significant cost component at 9.8%.Service and intervention costs comprise 5.7% of the total cost.For PP3M,drug treatment costs.which consist of antipsychotics used in practice.comprises 83.8% of the total cost,while outpatient follow-up cost ranks the second significant cost component at 10.3%.Service and intervention cost accounts for 5.1% of the total cost.Considering the QALY values (0.65-PP1M versus 0.70-PP3M),PP3M treatment has been found to be dominant compared to maintenance therapy with PPlM.(per QALY -6468.0 PPP-$) CONCLUSIONS: PP3M addresses unmet needs expected by new treatments due to several positive characteristics such as reduction of the treatment discontinuation risk,prevention of relapses,reduction in Healthcare Resource Use related to hospitalization.Therefore,PP3M has been determined to be cost-saving health technology by lowering the costs of hospitalization.drug treatment.adverse event and outpatient clinic.compared to maintenance schizophrenia therapy with PP1M.</abstract><cop>Lawrenceville</cop><pub>Elsevier Science Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.jval.2017.08.1890</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1098-3015
ispartof Value in health, 2017-10, Vol.20 (9), p.A713
issn 1098-3015
1524-4733
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2113726120
source Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Accounts
Antipsychotics
Compliance
Cost analysis
Critical incidents
Data processing
Discontinued
Drug abuse
Economic problems
Health care expenditures
Hospitalization
Intervention
Medical technology
Medical treatment
Mental disorders
Money
Outpatient treatment
Palmitic acid
Patients
Purchasing power parity
Quality adjusted life years
Risk reduction
Schizophrenia
Socioeconomic factors
title Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of The Paliperidone Palmitate 3-Month Formulation Versus 1-Month Formulation From A Healthcare Payer Perspective
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T21%3A17%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cost-Effectiveness%20Analysis%20of%20The%20Paliperidone%20Palmitate%203-Month%20Formulation%20Versus%201-Month%20Formulation%20From%20A%20Healthcare%20Payer%20Perspective&rft.jtitle=Value%20in%20health&rft.au=Arikan,%20Y&rft.date=2017-10&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=A713&rft.pages=A713-&rft.issn=1098-3015&rft.eissn=1524-4733&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jval.2017.08.1890&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2113726120%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2113726120&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true