ArticleClinical drug investigation2014
Comparison of health services use associated with ziprasidone and olanzapine among schizophrenia and bipolar disorder patients in the USA.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health Care Utilization and Treatment Persistence Associated with Oral Paliperidone and Lurasidone in Schizophrenia Treatment.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesZiprasidone is increasingly used for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. The purpose of this study was to compare healthcare costs and use associated with ziprasidone and olanzapine.
methodsZiprasidone and olanzapine treatment episodes of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder patients were identified in the 01/2007-12/2010 IMS LifeLink™ Database. The period of analysis for each episode has three components: 6 months prior to the episode initiation date (pre-episode period), 1 month immediately following the episode initiation date (initiation month), and up to 12 months after the end of the initiation month (follow-up period). Ordinary least squares regressions, general linear models, and two-part models were used to compare various types of costs (2007 US$) associated with the use of ziprasidone and olanzapine. Logistic regressions, Poisson regressions, and Hurdle models were used to compare the number of emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations associated with each drug.
resultsWe identified 7,138 (46.93 %) ziprasidone episodes and 8,072 (53.07 %) olanzapine episodes, and found that patients using ziprasidone were significantly younger (41.50 vs. 45.38 years) and were significantly less likely to be male (29.81 vs. 44.21 %). Regression analysis showed no significant differences in total costs between the two drugs. However, ziprasidone was associated with significantly higher medication costs (US$232, p < 0.01) and outpatient costs (US$501, p < 0.05), yet lower ED costs (-US$73, p < 0.05). Ziprasidone was also associated with fewer ED visits (0.266, p < 0.001) and hospitalizations (1.117, p < 0.001).
conclusionsZiprasidone is associated with higher medication costs and outpatient costs than olanzapine; however, it reduces patients' use of ED and inpatient services.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.