Literature DB >> 8941172

Evaluating outcomes of treatments for persons with psychotic disorders.

A F Lehman1.   

Abstract

Advances in the neurosciences, concerns about cost containment, and a growing consumer advocacy movement are creating new hopes and challenges for the development of more effective and cost-effective treatments for persons with psychotic disorders. Using the development of new antipsychotic agents for the treatment of schizophrenia as a prototype, this article examines the assessment of outcomes of treatments for these patients. Psychotic disorders exert a broad range of negative effects on patients' lives. This requires a broad view of outcomes to assess the relative effectiveness of alternative pharmacotherapies. The outcomes of interest cover the clinical, rehabilitative, humanitarian, and public welfare domains. Most of our knowledge about the efficacy of antipsychotic agents focuses on improvements in and prevention of positive symptoms of schizophrenia. However, better antipsychotic medications must show advantages above and beyond symptom suppression. We need to know not only whether alternative medications offer advantages in these other dimensions of outcome, but also how they interact with psychosocial treatments to enhance outcomes, how effective they are with patients in usual practices settings, and how cost-effective they are relative to other treatments. A research agenda for evaluating these impacts must include longer term outcome studies that evaluate the wider range of outcomes of interest to practitioners, patients, families, and payers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8941172

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Psychiatry        ISSN: 0160-6689            Impact factor:   4.384


  7 in total

1.  An expanded version of the Multnomah Community Ability Scale: anchors and interview probes for the assessment of adults with serious mental illness.

Authors:  Faith B Dickerson; Andrea E Origoni; Andrea Pater; Barrie K Friedman; William M Kordonski
Journal:  Community Ment Health J       Date:  2003-04

2.  A study of the construct validity of the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) in patients with schizophrenia.

Authors:  Nan Luo; Boon-Kheng Seng; Julian Thumboo; David Feeny; Shu-Chuen Li
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Clinical and economic outcomes of olanzapine compared with haloperidol for schizophrenia. Results from a randomised clinical trial.

Authors:  S H Hamilton; D A Revicki; E T Edgell; L A Genduso; G Tollefson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  Improving treatment for persons with schizophrenia.

Authors:  A F Lehman
Journal:  Psychiatr Q       Date:  1999

5.  Olanzapine versus risperidone. A prospective comparison of clinical and economic outcomes in schizophrenia.

Authors:  E T Edgell; S W Andersen; B M Johnstone; B Dulisse; D Revicki; A Breier
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Developing a Cognitive Training Strategy for First-Episode Schizophrenia: Integrating Bottom-Up and Top-Down Approaches.

Authors:  Keith H Nuechterlein; Joseph Ventura; Kenneth L Subotnik; Jacqueline N Hayata; Alice Medalia; Morris D Bell
Journal:  Am J Psychiatr Rehabil       Date:  2014-07

Review 7.  Assessing the value of antipsychotics for treating schizophrenia: the importance of evaluating and interpreting the clinical significance of individual service costs.

Authors:  Sandra L Tunis; Haya Ascher-Svanum; Michael Stensland; Bruce J Kinon
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 4.981

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.