Zuclopenthixol versus haloperidol: An observational randomised pharmacoeconomic evaluation of patients with chronic schizophrenia exhibiting acute psychosis
2003 International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice
Lamure, M. | Toumi, M. | Chabannes, JP. | Dansette, GY. | Benyaya, J. | Hansen, K. |
acute psychotic patient, antipsychotic drug, Cost Savings, costs and consequences, economic evaluation, Injections, Schizophrenia,
BACKGROUND Zuclopenthixol acetate is a rapid-acting injectable neuroleptic drug with duration of action that allows for administration once every to 2-3 days.
METHODS We used an open randomised multicentre controlled clinical trial of 88 inpatients with an acute psychosis of schizophrenia that also evaluated the resource consumption. The objective of this pharmacoeconomic evaluation was to compare cost-effectiveness of zuclopenthixol and haloperidol over a 3-month period. RESULTS Formal caregiver (nurse) time spent on injections and average hospital stay were considerably shorter in the zuclopenthixol group than for haloperidol and resulted in cost savings. A 44% reduction in minutes spent administering care was observed and the actual length of hospital stays was reduced by 5 days. An evaluation of the cost of the two treatment strategies was made. The average cost of treatment was 157 for zuclopenthixol and 86 for haloperidol. This disparity is, however, reduced when considering the difference in the average length of stay, and the significant reduction in treatment time. CONCLUSIONS The cost of the injectable neuroleptic represents a small fraction of the cost of care for acutely psychotic patients. Zuclopenthixol strategy appears to be the most cost-effective alternative