ArticleClinical drug investigation2016
Cost-Minimisation Analysis of Paliperidone Palmitate Long-Acting Treatment versus Risperidone Long-Acting Treatment for Schizophrenia in Spain.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health economics study of paliperidone palmitate in the treatment of schizophrenia: a 12-month cohort study.BMC psychiatry · 2024Article
- Effectiveness of 1-year treatment with long-acting formulation of aripiprazole, haloperidol, or paliperidone in patients with schizophrenia: retrospective study in a real-world clinical setting.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveLong-acting formulations for paliperidone (PPLAT) and risperidone (RLAT) are effective second-generation antipsychotics. This study aimed to compare treatment costs between PPLAT and RLAT in schizophrenia patients.
methodsA cost-minimization analysis was performed from the perspective of the Spanish National Healthcare System (NHS), in line with the approach accepted by the Scottish Medicine Consortium evaluation. Only direct health costs (€, 2015) were included, i.e. medication (including oral antipsychotic drug supplementation), hospitalization and cost of administration in the community. Two time horizons were used: 1 year (to compare initiation treatment) and 2 years (to compare maintenance treatment). Base-case considered the following assumptions: setting for treatment initiation (50 % hospital and 50 % community); 50 % of patients initiating from a long-acting treatment and 50 % from an oral antipsychotic; no reduction in the length of stay. One-way sensitivity analyses (SA) were performed.
resultsThe estimated costs/patient were €7698 (PPLAT) and €8168 (RLAT) for the first year, and €4314 (PPLAT) and €5003 (RLAT) for the second year. Cost savings related to PPLAT therapy were €470 and €689 for first and second year, respectively. SA results confirmed the robustness of the model results, even in the most conservative scenarios: (1) if 100 % of patients initiate treatment in hospital, the savings could be €454 per patient; (2) if 100 % of patients initiate treatment from an oral antipsychotic, the savings could be €277 per patient/year; and (3) if PPLAT could not reduce the length of stay by approximately one-third, as some studies indicate, the savings could be €470 per patient/year.
conclusionsThe use of PPLAT instead of RLAT could be a cost-saving strategy for the Spanish NHS.
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.