Skip to main content
Log in

Modelling the treated course of schizophrenia: Development of a discrete event simulation model

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In schizophrenia, modelling techniques may be needed to estimate the long-term costs and effects of new interventions. However, it seems that a simple direct link between symptoms and costs does not exist. Decisions about whether a patient will be hospitalized or admitted to a different healthcare setting are based not only on symptoms but also on social and environmental factors. This paper describes the development of a model to assess the dependencies between a broad range of parameters in the treatment of schizophrenia. In particular, the model attempts to incorporate social and environmental factors into the decision-making process for the prescription of new drugs to patients. The model was used to analyse the potential benefits of improving compliance with medication by 20% in patients in the UK. A discrete event simulation (DES) model was developed, to describe a cohort of schizophrenia patients with multiple psychotic episodes. The model takes into account the patient’s sex, disease severity, potential risk of harm to self and society, and social and environmental factors. Other variables that change over time include the number of psychiatric consultations, the presence of psychotic episodes, symptoms, treatments, compliance, side-effects, the lack of ability to take care of him/herself, care setting and risk of harm. Outcomes are costs, psychotic episodes and symptoms. Univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses were performed. Direct medical costs were considered (year of costing 2002), applying a 6.0% discount rate for costs and a 1.5% discount rate for outcome. The timeframe of the model is 5 years. When 50% of the decisions about the patient care setting are based on symptoms, a 20% increase in compliance was estimated to save £16 147 and to avoid 0.55 psychotic episodes per patient over 5 years. Sensitivity analysis showed that the costs savings associated with increased compliance are robust over a range of variations in parameters. DES offers a flexible structure for modelling a disease, taking into account how a patient’s history affects the course of the disease over time. This approach is particularly pertinent to schizophrenia, in which treatment decisions are complex. The model shows that better compliance increases the time between relapses, decreases the symptom score, and reduces the requirement for treatment in an intensive patient care setting, leading to cost savings. The extent of the cost savings depends on the relative importance of symptoms and of social and environmental factors in these decisions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1.
Table I
PANSS
Table II
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Table III
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schizophrenia Platform. Divided attention, shared care: from problem areas to quality in the care of patients with schizophrenia. The Netherlands: Schizophrenia Platform, May 2000

  2. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Schizophrenia: core interventions in the treatment and management of schizophrenia in primary and secondary care. National clinical practice guideline number 1. London: NICE, 2003

  3. Tran PV, Dellva M, Tollefson GD, et al. Oral olanzapine versus oral haloperidol in the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia and related psychoses. Br J Psychiatry 1998; 172: 499–505

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sartorius N, Fleischhacker W, Gjerris A, et al. The usefulness and use of second generation antipsychotic medications: review of evidence and recommendations by a task force of the World Psychiatric Association. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2002; 15 (Suppl. 1): 1–51

    Google Scholar 

  5. Caro JJ. Pharmacoeconomic analyses using discrete event simulation. PharmacoEconomics 2005; 23: 323–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sadock BJ, Sadock VA. Kaplan & Sadock’s pocket handbook of clinical psychiatry, 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Carpenter WT Jr, Buchanan RW. Schizophrenia [review]. N Engl J Med 1994; 330: 681–90

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Csernansky JG, Mahmoud R, Brenner R. and the Risperidone-USA-79 Study GroupA comparison of risperidone and haloperidol for the prevention of relapse in patients with schizophrenia. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 16–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. McIntyre R, Trakas K, Lin D, et al. Risk of adverse events associated with antipsychotic treatment: results from the Canadian National Outcomes Measurement Study in Schizophrenia (CNOMSS). 51st Annual Canadian Psychiatric Association Meeting; 2001 Nov 15-19; Montreal, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  10. Wirshing DA, Wirshing WC, Kysar L, et al. Novel antipsychotics: comparison of weight gain liabilities. J Clin Psychiatry 1999; 60: 358–63

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Fleischhacker WW, Oehl MA, Hummer M. Factors influencing compliance in schizophrenia patients. J Clin Psychiatry 2003; 64 (Suppl. 16): 10–3

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Health Care Insurance Board. Pharmacopoeia, the Netherlands 2002. Amstelveen: Health Care Insurance Board, November 2001. p. 84

  13. Hunt GE, Bergen J, Bashir M. Medication compliance and comorbid substance abuse in schizophrenia: impact on community survival 4 years after a relapse. Schizophr Res 2002; 54: 253–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hogarty GE. Depot neuroleptics: the relevance of psychosocial factors — a United States perspective. J Clin Psychiatry 1984; 45: 36–42

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Newman SC, Bland RC. Mortality in a cohort of patients with schizophrenia: a record linkage study. Can J Psychiatry 1991; 36: 239–45

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Taylor DM, Wright T, Libretto SE. and the Risperidone Olanzapine Drug Outcomes Studies in Schizophrenia (RODOS) U.K. Investigator GroupRisperidone compared with olanzapine in a naturalistic clinical study: a cost analysis. J Clin Psychiatry 2003; 64: 589–97

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Larsen TK, Moe LC, Vibe-Hansen L, et al. Premorbid functioning versus duration of untreated psychosis in 1 year outcome in first-episode psychosis. Schizophr Res 2000; 45: 1–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Geddes J, Freemantle N, Harrison P, et al. Atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia: systematic overview and meta-regression analysis [Review]. BMJ 2000; 321: 1371–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Shaw J. Assessing the risk of violence in patients. BMJ 2000; 320: 1088–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Arango C, Calcedo Barba A, Gonzalez-Salvador C, et al. Violence in inpatients with schizophrenia: a prospective study. Schizophr Bull 1999; 25: 493–503

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Cheung P, Schweitzer I, Crowley K, et al. Aggressive behaviour in schizophrenia: the role of psychopathology. Aust NZ J Psychiatry 1997; 31: 62–7

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Drug Tariff November 2002. London: Department of Health & National Assembly for Wales, 2002

  23. Netten A, Curtis L. Unit costs of health care and social care 2002. Canterbury, Kent: Personal Social Services Research Unit Report, 2002. Available from URL: http://www.pssru.ac.uk/pdf/uc2002/Unit%20Costs%202002.pdf [Accessed 1 April 2005]

    Google Scholar 

  24. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guidance for manufacturers and sponsors: technology appraisals process series No 5. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence, 2001

  25. Guest J, Cookson R. Cost of schizophrenia to UK Society. An incident-based cost-of-illness model for the first 5 years following diagnosis. PharmacoEconomics 1999; 15: 597–610

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Professor J. Urquhart for his comments on compliance, A. van Gestel (MSc) for her help during the project, and K. Trakas (PhD) and A. Mehnert (PhD) for their help in writing the article. Moreover, they would like to thank the members of the English expert panel [J. Falkowsky (MD), M. Baggaley (MD), Professor M. Knapp and M. Potter (MD)] and the members of the Dutch expert panel [G. van Aalst (MD), P. Dries (MD), L. de Haan (PhD, MD), Professor J. van Os and L. Perquin (PhD, MD)]. Finally, they would also like to thank Janssen Pharmaceutica, N.V., Belgium, for financing the development of this model.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bart M. S. Heeg.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Heeg, B.M.S., Buskens, E., Knapp, M. et al. Modelling the treated course of schizophrenia: Development of a discrete event simulation model. Pharmacoeconomics 23 (Suppl 1), 17–33 (2005). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200523001-00003

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200523001-00003

Keywords

Navigation