Economic evaluation of a behavior-modifying intervention to enhance antiepileptic drug adherence

Plumpton, Catrin; Brown, Ian; Reuber, Markus; Marson, Anthony G; Hughes, Dyfrig

doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2015.01.035

Cited by 14 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 43 publications

(35 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Three studies were identified that looked at the costeffectiveness of epilepsy surgery and compared it with 35 20 2 5 90.9 Beretta et al 47 15 5 7 75.0 Blais et al 36 19 2 6 90.5 Bolin et al 23 17 5 4 77.3 Bowen et al 40 22 1 4 95.7 Chisholm et al 20 16 7 4 69.6 Chisholm et al 21 14 9 4 60.9 Clements et al 39 19 4 4 82.6 Craig et al 32 12 11 4 52.2 De Kinderen et al 44 21 2 3 91.3 De Kinderen et al 43 19 1 7 95.0 Frew et al 33 16 6 5 72.7 Gharibnaseri et al 34 16 5 6 76.2 Gureje et al 22 5 17 5 22.7 Hawkins et al 29 22 0 4 100.0 Helmers et al 45 16 5 6 76.2 Jentink et al 66 31 18 5 4 78.3 Lee et al 51 22 1 4 95.7 Lee et al 52 19 3 5 86.4 Majoie et al 46 11 8 8 57.9 Maltoni and Messori 27 18 5 4 78.3 Marson et al 17 21 1 5 95.5 Noble et al 48 19 1 7 95.0 Oldham et al 42 9 11 7 45.0 Plumpton et al 49 16 6 5 72.7 Rane et al 50 4 16 7 20.0 Remak et al 16 18 5 4 78.3 Remak et al 28 16 5 6 76.2 Simoens et al 24 23 0 4 100.0 Spackman et al 30 20 3 4 87.0 Suh and Lee 37 18 4 5 81.8 Van Hout et al 15 11 11 5 50.0 Vera-Llonch et al 26 18 5 4 78.3 Verdian et al 38 23 0 4 100.0 Widjaja et al 41 18 4 5 81.8 Average quality score: 77.0 "Yes" indicates sufficiently/correctly described and conducted in the study; "No" indicates insufficient, wrong, or no information regarding the specific topic in the study; NA, not applicable. A full description of the items can be found in Appendix S2.…”

Section: Epilepsy Surgerymentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of economic evaluations of treatments for patients with epilepsy

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing number of treatment options and the high costs associated with epilepsy have fostered the development of economic evaluations in epilepsy. It is important to examine the availability and quality of these economic evaluations and to identify potential research gaps. As well as looking at both pharmacologic (antiepileptic drugs [AEDs]) and nonpharmacologic (e.g., epilepsy surgery, ketogenic diet, vagus nerve stimulation) therapies, this review examines the methodologic quality of the full economic evaluations included. Literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Econlit, Web of Science, and CEA Registry. In addition, Cochrane Reviews, Cochrane DARE and Cochrane Health Technology Assessment Databases were used. To identify relevant studies, predefined clinical search strategies were combined with a search filter designed to identify health economic studies. Specific search strategies were devised for the following topics: (1) AEDs, (2) patients with cognitive deficits, (3) elderly patients, (4) epilepsy surgery, (5) ketogenic diet, (6) vagus nerve stimulation, and (7) treatment of (non)convulsive status epilepticus. A total of 40 publications were included in this review, 29 (73%) of which were articles about pharmacologic interventions. Mean quality score of all articles on the Consensus Health Economic Criteria (CHEC)-extended was 81.8%, the lowest quality score being 21.05%, whereas five studies had a score of 100%. Looking at the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS), the average quality score was 77.0%, the lowest being 22.7%, and four studies rated as 100%. There was a substantial difference in methodology in all included articles, which hampered the attempt to combine information meaningfully. Overall, the methodologic quality was acceptable; however, some studies performed significantly worse than others. The heterogeneity between the studies stresses the need to define a reference case (e.g., how should an economic evaluation within epilepsy be performed) and to derive consensus on what constitutes "standard optimal care."

show abstract

Section: Epilepsy Surgerymentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of economic evaluations of treatments for patients with epilepsy

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Non-adherence to treatment can be associated with serious issues in patients with epilepsy. 10 As well as being a proven trigger for status epilepticus, 11 non-adherence has been associated with higher rates of hospitalization, 12 worse longterm seizure control 13 and increased healthcare costs, 14 compared with patients who are adherent. Therefore, when making treatment decisions, factors affecting compliance should always be considered.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

EARLY-ESLI study: Long-term experience with eslicarbazepine acetate after first monotherapy failure

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Published evidence suggests that adherence-enhancing interventions are cost-effective or cost-saving 31,32. However, more studies on the cost-effectiveness of pharmacist-delivered interventions to improve adherence are needed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of a pharmacist-led educational interview on medication adherence of Saudi patients with epilepsy

AlAjmi¹,

Al-Aqeel²,

Baz³

2017

PPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To evaluate the effectiveness of a pharmacist-led educational interview in terms of adherence to antiepileptic drug administration among adult patients with epilepsy. Method Sixty adult patients with epilepsy who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were recruited. A pharmacist-led educational interview was conducted with the intervention group (n=30). Patients in the control group (n=30) were interviewed and contacted 6 weeks after the initial visit without receiving any intervention. Antiepileptic drug adherence was measured during clinic visits, and 6 weeks afterwards using the 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale. This prospective interventional study was conducted between September and December 2013. Results Only 29 control patients and 27 intervention patients completed the 6 weeks post-intervention adherence measurement. The adherence score average in the intervention group was 5.26±0.98 at baseline and improved to 6.7±0.823 ( P <0.0001) after intervention. In the control group, the adherence score average was 5.76±1.806 at baseline and 5.83±1.627 at 6 weeks ( P =0.792). While there was no statistically significant difference in adherence score between intervention and control groups at baseline, the post-intervention difference was significant ( P =0.024). Conclusion Our study suggests that pharmacist-led educational interviews had a positive impact on medication adherence in patients with epilepsy.

show abstract

Economic evaluation of a behavior-modifying intervention to enhance antiepileptic drug adherence

Cited by 14 publications

References 43 publications

A systematic review of economic evaluations of treatments for patients with epilepsy

A systematic review of economic evaluations of treatments for patients with epilepsy

EARLY-ESLI study: Long-term experience with eslicarbazepine acetate after first monotherapy failure

The impact of a pharmacist-led educational interview on medication adherence of Saudi patients with epilepsy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About