Total healthcare cost savings through improved bipolar I disorder identification using the Rapid Mood Screener in patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder

5Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Introduction: Misdiagnosis of bipolar I disorder (BP-I) as major depressive disorder (MDD) leads to increased healthcare resource utilization and costs. The cost-effectiveness of the Rapid Mood Screener (RMS), a tool to identify BP-I in patients with depressive symptoms, was assessed in patients diagnosed with MDD presenting with depressive episodes. Methods: A decision-tree model of a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients in a US health plan was used to estimate the number of correct diagnoses and overall total, direct healthcare costs over a 3-year timeframe for RMS-screened versus unscreened patients. Model inputs included the prevalence of BP-I in patients diagnosed with MDD, RMS sensitivity/specificity, and the cost of misdiagnosing BP-I as MDD. Results: Screening with the RMS resulted in 171, 159, and 143 additional correct BP-I or MDD diagnoses at Years 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Total healthcare plan cost savings were $1279 per patient in Year 1. Cumulative cost savings per patient for RMS screening versus no RMS screening were $2307 over 2 years and $3011 over 3 years. Scenario analyses showed that the RMS would remain cost-saving assuming a lower prevalence of BP-I (20% or 10%) versus the base case (24.3%). Conclusion: The RMS is a cost-effective tool to identify BP-I in patients who would otherwise be misdiagnosed with MDD. Screening with the RMS resulted in cost-savings over 3 years, with model results remaining robust even with lower prevalence of BP-I and reduced RMS sensitivity assumptions.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

McIntyre, R. S., Bloudek, L., Timmons, J. Y., Gillard, P., & Harrington, A. (2023). Total healthcare cost savings through improved bipolar I disorder identification using the Rapid Mood Screener in patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder. Current Medical Research and Opinion, 39(4), 605–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2023.2177413

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free