Costs of treating patients with schizophrenia who have illness-related crisis events

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Relatively little is known about the relationship between psychosocial crises and treatment costs for persons with schizophrenia. This naturalistic prospective study assessed the association of recent crises with mental health treatment costs among persons receiving treatment for schizophrenia.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data were drawn from a large multi-site, non-interventional study of schizophrenia patients in the United States, conducted between 1997 and 2003. Participants were treated at mental health treatment systems, including the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals, community mental health centers, community and state hospitals, and university health care service systems. Total costs over a 1-year period for mental health services and component costs (psychiatric hospitalizations, antipsychotic medications, other psychotropic medications, day treatment, emergency psychiatric services, psychosocial/rehabilitation group therapy, individual therapy, medication management, and case management) were calculated for 1557 patients with complete medical information. Direct mental health treatment costs for patients who had experienced 1 or more of 5 recent crisis events were compared to propensity-matched samples of persons who had not experienced a crisis event. The 5 non-mutually exclusive crisis event subgroups were: suicide attempt in the past 4 weeks (n = 18), psychiatric hospitalization in the past 6 months (n = 240), arrest in the past 6 months (n = 56), violent behaviors in the past 4 weeks (n = 62), and diagnosis of a co-occurring substance use disorder (n = 413).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Across all 5 categories of crisis events, patients who had a recent crisis had higher average annual mental health treatment costs than patients in propensity-score matched comparison samples. Average annual mental health treatment costs were significantly higher for persons who attempted suicide ($46,024), followed by persons with psychiatric hospitalization in the past 6 months ($37,329), persons with prior arrests ($31,081), and persons with violent behaviors ($18,778). Total cost was not significantly higher for those with co-occurring substance use disorder ($19,034).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Recent crises, particularly suicide attempts, psychiatric hospitalizations, and criminal arrests, are predictive of higher mental health treatment costs in schizophrenia patients.</p

The association between employment and the health of people with intellectual disabilities:a systematic review

Background:  There is strong evidence indicating that paid employment is generally good for the physical and mental health of the general population. This systematic review considers the association between employment and the health of people with intellectual disabilities.  Methods:  Studies published from 1990 to 2018 were identified via electronic literature databases, email requests and cross-citations. Identified studies were reviewed narratively.  Results: Twelve studies were identified. Studies were generally consistent in reporting an association between being in paid employment and better physical or mental health status.  Conclusions: This review supports the view that the well-established association between employment and better health is similar for adults with and without intellectual disabilities. However, evidence establishing causality is lacking and further research to determine specific health benefits attributable to employment for people with intellectual disabilities and the causal pathways that operate is required

Time to discontinuation of atypical versus typical antipsychotics in the naturalistic treatment of schizophrenia

BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing debate over whether atypical antipsychotics are more effective than typical antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia. This naturalistic study compares atypical and typical antipsychotics on time to all-cause medication discontinuation, a recognized index of medication effectiveness in the treatment of schizophrenia. METHODS: We used data from a large, 3-year, observational, non-randomized, multisite study of schizophrenia, conducted in the U.S. between 7/1997 and 9/2003. Patients who were initiated on oral atypical antipsychotics (clozapine, olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine, or ziprasidone) or oral typical antipsychotics (low, medium, or high potency) were compared on time to all-cause medication discontinuation for 1 year following initiation. Treatment group comparisons were based on treatment episodes using 3 statistical approaches (Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, Cox Proportional Hazards regression model, and propensity score-adjusted bootstrap resampling methods). To further assess the robustness of the findings, sensitivity analyses were performed, including the use of (a) only 1 medication episode for each patient, the one with which the patient was treated first, and (b) all medication episodes, including those simultaneously initiated on more than 1 antipsychotic. RESULTS: Mean time to all-cause medication discontinuation was longer on atypical (N = 1132, 256.3 days) compared to typical antipsychotics (N = 534, 197.2 days; p < .01), and longer on atypicals compared to typicals of high potency (N = 320, 187.5 days; p < .01), medium potency (N = 140, 213.5 days; p < .01), and low potency (N = 74, 208.7 days; p < .01). Among the atypicals, only clozapine, olanzapine, and risperidone had significantly longer time to all-cause medication discontinuation compared to typicals, regardless of potency level, and compared to haloperidol with prophylactic anticholinergic treatment. When compared to perphenazine, a medium-potency typical antipsychotic, only clozapine and olanzapine had a consistently and significantly longer time to all-cause medication discontinuation. Results were confirmed by sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: In the usual care of schizophrenia patients, time to medication discontinuation for any cause appears significantly longer for atypical than typical antipsychotics regardless of the typical antipsychotic potency level. Findings were primarily driven by clozapine and olanzapine, and to a lesser extent by risperidone. Furthermore, only clozapine and olanzapine therapy showed consistently and significantly longer treatment duration compared to perphenazine, a medium-potency typical antipsychotic

Change in level of productivity in the treatment of schizophrenia with olanzapine or other antipsychotics

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>When treating schizophrenia, improving patients' productivity level is a major goal considering schizophrenia is a leading cause of functional disability. Productivity level has been identified as the most preferred treatment outcome by patients with schizophrenia. However, little has been done to systematically investigate productivity levels in schizophrenia. We set out to better understand the change in productivity level among chronically ill patients with schizophrenia treated with olanzapine compared with other antipsychotic medications. We also assessed the links between productivity level and other clinical outcomes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This post hoc analysis used data from 6 randomized, double-blind clinical trials of patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, with each trial being of approximately 6 months duration. Change in productivity level was compared between olanzapine-treated patients (HGBG, n = 172; HGHJ, n = 277; HGJB, n = 171; HGLB, n = 281; HGGN, n = 159; HGDH, n = 131) and patients treated with other antipsychotic medications (separately vs. haloperidol [HGGN, n = 97; HGDH, n = 132], risperidone [HGBG, n = 167; HGGN, n = 158], quetiapine [HGJB, n = 175], ziprasidone [HGHJ, n = 271] and aripiprazole [HGLB, n = 285]). Productivity was defined as functional activities/work including working for pay, studying, housekeeping and volunteer work. Productivity level in the prior 3 months was assessed on a 5-point scale ranging from no useful functioning to functional activity/work 75% to 100% of the time.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Chronically ill patients treated with olanzapine (OLZ) experienced significantly greater improvement in productivity when compared to patients treated with risperidone (RISP) (OLZ = 0.22 ± 1.19, RISP = -0.03 ± 1.17, p = 0.033) or ziprasidone (ZIP) (OLZ = 0.50 ± 1.38, ZIP = 0.25 ± 1.27, p = 0.026), but did not significantly differ from the quetiapine, aripiprazole or haloperidol treatment groups. Among first episode patients, OLZ therapy was associated with greater improvements in productivity levels compared to haloperidol (HAL), during the acute phase (OLZ = -0.31 ± 1.59, HAL = -0.69 ± 1.56, p = 0.011) and over the long-term (OLZ = 0.10 ± 1.50, HAL = -0.32 ± 1.91, p = 0.008). Significantly more chronically ill and first episode patients treated with olanzapine showed moderately high (>50%-75% of the time) and high levels of productivity (>75%-100% of the time) at endpoint, when compared to risperidone or haloperidol-treated patients (p < .05), respectively. Higher productivity level was associated with significantly higher study completion rates and better scores on the positive, negative, disorganized thoughts, hostility and depression subscales of the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Some antipsychotic medications significantly differed in beneficial impact on productivity level in the long-term treatment of patients with schizophrenia. Findings further highlight the link between clinical and functional outcomes, showing significant associations between higher productivity, lower symptom severity and better persistence on therapy.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>clinicaltrials.gov identifier <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00088049">NCT00088049</a>; <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00036088">NCT00036088</a></p

A real-life observational study of the effectiveness of FACT in a Dutch mental health region

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>ACT is an effective community treatment but causes discontinuity of care between acutely ill and currently stable patient groups. The Dutch variant of ACT, FACT, combines both intensive ACT treatment and care for patients requiring less intensive care at one time point yet likely to need ACT in the future. It may be hypothesised that this case mix is not beneficial for patients requiring intensive care, as other patient groups may "dilute" care provision. The effectiveness of FACT was compared with standard care, with a particular focus on possible moderating effects of patient characteristics within the case mix in FACT.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In 2002, three FACT teams were implemented in a Dutch region in which a cumulative routine outcome measurement system was in place. Patients receiving FACT were compared with patients receiving standard treatment, matched on "baseline" symptom severity and age, using propensity score matching. Outcome was the probability of being in symptomatic remission of psychotic symptoms.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The probability of symptomatic remission was higher for SMI patients receiving FACT than for controls receiving standard treatment, but only when there was an unmet need for care with respect to psychotic symptoms (OR = 6.70, p = 0.002; 95% CI = 1.97 – 22.7).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Compared to standard care, FACT was more rather than less effective, but only when a need for care with respect to psychotic symptoms is present. This suggests that there is no adverse effect of using broader patient mixes in providing continuity of care for all patients with severe mental illness in a defined geographical area.</p

Focus on Function – a randomized controlled trial comparing two rehabilitation interventions for young children with cerebral palsy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Children with cerebral palsy receive a variety of long-term physical and occupational therapy interventions to facilitate development and to enhance functional independence in movement, self-care, play, school activities and leisure. Considerable human and financial resources are directed at the "intervention" of the problems of cerebral palsy, although the available evidence supporting current interventions is inconclusive. A considerable degree of uncertainty remains about the appropriate therapeutic approaches to manage the habilitation of children with cerebral palsy. The primary objective of this project is to conduct a multi-site randomized clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of a task/context-focused approach compared to a child-focused remediation approach in improving performance of functional tasks and mobility, increasing participation in everyday activities, and improving quality of life in children 12 months to 5 years of age who have cerebral palsy.</p> <p>Method/Design</p> <p>A multi-centred randomized controlled trial research design will be used. Children will be recruited from a representative sample of children attending publicly-funded regional children's rehabilitation centers serving children with disabilities in Ontario and Alberta in Canada. Target sample size is 220 children with cerebral palsy aged 12 months to 5 years at recruitment date. Therapists are randomly assigned to deliver either a context-focused approach or a child-focused approach. Children follow their therapist into their treatment arm. Outcomes will be evaluated at baseline, after 6 months of treatment and at a 3-month follow-up period. Outcomes represent the components of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, including body function and structure (range of motion), activities (performance of functional tasks, motor function), participation (involvement in formal and informal activities), and environment (parent perceptions of care, parental empowerment).</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This paper presents the background information, design and protocol for a randomized controlled trial comparing a task/context-focused approach to a child-focused remediation approach in improving functional outcomes for young children with cerebral palsy.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>[clinical trial registration #: NCT00469872]</p