Literature DB >> 8730935

Are SSRIs a cost-effective alternative to tricyclics?

M Hotopf1, G Lewis, C Normand.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are more expensive than tricyclics. Reports have suggested that SSRIs are cost-effective because they are better tolerated and safer in overdose.
METHOD: A systematic review of all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), meta-analyses, and cost-effectiveness studies comparing SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs).
RESULTS: None of the RCTs provided an economic analysis and there were methodological problems in the majority which would preclude this approach. Meta-analyses suggest that clinical efficacy is equivalent but slightly fewer patients prescribed SSRIs drop out of RCTs. Cost-effectiveness studies have been based on crude 'modelling' approaches and over-estimate the difference in attrition rates and the cost of treatment failure. It appears impossible to evaluate the economic aspects of suicide because of its rarity.
CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence to suggest that SSRIs are more cost-effective than TCAs. The debate will only be concluded when a prospective cost-effectiveness study is done in the setting of a large primary care based RCT.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8730935     DOI: 10.1192/bjp.168.4.404

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Psychiatry        ISSN: 0007-1250            Impact factor:   9.319


  11 in total

Review 1.  Pharmacological treatment of severe psychiatric disorders in the developing world : lessons from India.

Authors:  Vikram Patel; Chittaranjan Andrade
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 5.749

Review 2.  Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of antidepressants : a critical appraisal of methods.

Authors:  Sheikh Usman Iqbal; Mark Prashker
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Adverse effects associated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  E Trindade; D Menon; L A Topfer; C Coloma
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1998-11-17       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 4.  Putting trials on trial--the costs and consequences of small trials in depression: a systematic review of methodology.

Authors:  M Hotopf; G Lewis; C Normand
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 3.710

5.  Psychopharmacoepidemiology in Iceland: effects of regulations and new medications.

Authors:  T Helgason; J K Björnsson; T Zoëga; H S Thorsteinsson; H Tómasson
Journal:  Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 5.270

6.  Which antidepressant? A commentary from general practice on evidence-based medicine and health economics.

Authors:  D P Kernick
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 7.  The economics of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in depression: a critical review.

Authors:  L Frank; D A Revicki; S V Sorensen; Y C Shih
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 5.749

Review 8.  Fluoxetine. A pharmacoeconomic review of its use in depression.

Authors:  M I Wilde; P Benfield
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 9.  The need for an iterative process for assessing economic outcomes associated with SSRIs.

Authors:  T L Skaer; D A Sclar; L M Robison; R S Galin
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Which antidepressants are best tolerated in primary care? A pilot randomized trial from goa.

Authors:  J Pereira; V Patel
Journal:  Indian J Psychiatry       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 1.759

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.