Despite the enormous costs associated to mood disorders’, few studies evaluate potential cost saving from the use of pharmacogenetic tests (PGT). This study compares 12 months before the execution of the PGT versus 12 months after, in terms of number and days of hospitalization and accesses to emergency services, in a sample of 30 patients affected by bipolar disorder. Secondarily, the study gives an economic value to the data based on the diagnosis-related group (DRG). Patients included in the study were required to be aged ≥18 years, sign an informed consent, have a score of Clinical Global Impression item Severity (CGIs) ≥3, and have a discordant therapy compared to the PGT in the 12 months preceding it and a therapy consistent with it for the following 12 months. Cost saving has been evaluated by paired t-tests in a mirror analysis. Statistically significant differences in all the comparisons (p < 0.0001) emerged. Important cost saving emerged after the use of PGT (€148,920 the first year versus €39,048 the following year). Despite the small sample size and lack of a control group in this study, the potential role of PGT in cost saving for the treatment of bipolar disorder treatment emerged. To confirm this result, larger and clinical trials are needed.
Pharmacogenetic Tests in Reducing Accesses to Emergency Services and Days of Hospitalization in Bipolar Disorder: A 2-Year Mirror Analysis
Callegari, Camilla
Primo
Conceptualization
;Isella, CelesteSecondo
Data Curation
;Caselli, IvanoFormal Analysis
;Poloni, NicolaPenultimo
Investigation
;Ielmini, MartaUltimo
Writing – Review & Editing
2019-01-01
Abstract
Despite the enormous costs associated to mood disorders’, few studies evaluate potential cost saving from the use of pharmacogenetic tests (PGT). This study compares 12 months before the execution of the PGT versus 12 months after, in terms of number and days of hospitalization and accesses to emergency services, in a sample of 30 patients affected by bipolar disorder. Secondarily, the study gives an economic value to the data based on the diagnosis-related group (DRG). Patients included in the study were required to be aged ≥18 years, sign an informed consent, have a score of Clinical Global Impression item Severity (CGIs) ≥3, and have a discordant therapy compared to the PGT in the 12 months preceding it and a therapy consistent with it for the following 12 months. Cost saving has been evaluated by paired t-tests in a mirror analysis. Statistically significant differences in all the comparisons (p < 0.0001) emerged. Important cost saving emerged after the use of PGT (€148,920 the first year versus €39,048 the following year). Despite the small sample size and lack of a control group in this study, the potential role of PGT in cost saving for the treatment of bipolar disorder treatment emerged. To confirm this result, larger and clinical trials are needed.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.