↓ Skip to main content

Economic Impact in Medicaid Beneficiaries with Schizophrenia and Cardiometabolic Comorbidities Treated with Once-Monthly Paliperidone Palmitate vs. Oral Atypical Antipsychotics

Overview of attention for article published in Drugs - Real World Outcomes, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Economic Impact in Medicaid Beneficiaries with Schizophrenia and Cardiometabolic Comorbidities Treated with Once-Monthly Paliperidone Palmitate vs. Oral Atypical Antipsychotics
Published in
Drugs - Real World Outcomes, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s40801-018-0130-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie-Hélène Lafeuille, Neeta Tandon, Sean Tiggelaar, Rhiannon Kamstra, Patrick Lefebvre, Edward Kim, Yong Yue, Kruti Joshi

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare persistence, costs, and healthcare resource utilization in patients with schizophrenia and cardiometabolic comorbidities treated with once-monthly paliperidone palmitate or an oral atypical antipsychotic. Medicaid data from six states (07/2009-03/2015) were used to identify adults with schizophrenia and cardiometabolic comorbidities initiated on once-monthly paliperidone palmitate or an oral atypical antipsychotic (index date) on 01/2010 or after. Persistence to index medication at 12 months (no gap ≥ 90 days) was compared between patients taking once-monthly paliperidone palmitate and an oral atypical antipsychotic using Chi-squared tests. The 12-month post-index healthcare costs and healthcare resource utilization were compared using multivariate ordinary least squares and Poisson regression, respectively. Selected patients taking once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (n = 371) were younger (mean age: 45.0 vs. 47.5 years, standardized difference = 24%) than patients taking oral atypical antipsychotics (n = 8296). Persistence at 12 months was higher in patients taking once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (40 vs. 33%, p = 0.006). Adjusted all-cause medical costs were lower in patients taking once-monthly paliperidone palmitate vs. patients taking oral atypical antipsychotics (mean monthly cost differences = US $ - 369, p = 0.004) while all-cause pharmacy costs were higher (mean monthly cost differences = US $279, p < 0.001), resulting in no significant difference in total costs (mean monthly cost differences = US $ - 90, p = 0.357). No significant difference was observed in cardiometabolic comorbidity-related pharmacy or medical costs. Compared with patients taking oral atypical antipsychotics, patients taking once-monthly paliperidone palmitate had more schizophrenia-related outpatient visits (incidence rate ratio = 1.44, p < 0.001) but fewer cardiometabolic comorbidity-related inpatient admissions (incidence rate ratio = 0.73, p < 0.001) with shorter lengths of stay (incidence rate ratio = 0.72, p = 0.020), and fewer cardiometabolic comorbidity-related long-term care admissions (incidence rate ratio = 0.56, p = 0.016). Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia and cardiometabolic comorbidities who were initiated on once-monthly paliperidone palmitate had similar 12-month total healthcare costs compared with oral atypical antipsychotics. Cardiometabolic comorbidity-related utilization of inpatient and long-term care services was lower in patients taking once-monthly paliperidone palmitate.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 43%
Other 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 4 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Psychology 2 10%
Other 6 29%
Unknown 3 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 January 2018.
All research outputs
#18,584,192
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Drugs - Real World Outcomes
#146
of 186 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#330,243
of 441,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs - Real World Outcomes
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 186 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,019 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.