RT期刊文章SR电子T1抗癫痫药物与课堂有关的医疗成本在儿科患者启动单一疗法治疗部分性癫痫(P3.228)摩根富林明神经病学神经学乔FD Lippincott Williams &威尔金斯SP P3.228 VO 88是16补充A1小云锅A1富尔顿维A1克里斯Kozma A1乔伊斯·克莱默年2017 UL //www.ez-admanager.com/conten首页t/88/16_Supplement/P3.228.abstract AB目的:比较1年医疗费用后开始与钠离子通道阻滞剂(渣打银行)抗癫痫药物(AED)单药治疗与non-sodium通道阻滞剂(NSCB) AED单一疗法在儿科患者部分性癫痫发作。背景:疗效比较研究可以帮助医疗决策者理解是否启动治疗aed不同机制的行动可以影响患者的结果在实际设置。在儿科中这是一个有待研究的一部分。设计/方法:美国行政索赔数据库被用来识别商业保险,部分发作(ICD-9-CM = 345.4×345.5 x),儿科患者(年龄< 18岁)与初始渣打银行或NSCB AED单一疗法(第一个药物声称=索引日期)。15天处方,没有AED宣称在6个月预先索引期间定义初始AED单一疗法。前患者连续资格6个月,12个月的处方。持久性是通过最终可用剂量从指数衡量的。医疗成本(美元)在1年期处方评价日期通过索引AED(渣打银行、NSCB)和年龄类别(0 < 4 4 < 10和10 < 18)。广义线性模型对6个月预先索引使用伽马分布和控制成本和性别是用来评估成本。结果:共有2824例4577年渣打银行集团和NSCB组。更大比例的渣打银行组只有指数单一疗法处方(73.8% vs . 68.6%;p < 0.0001)和持久性更长渣打银行(238天还是215天; p<0.0001). Adjusted total healthcare costs were lower in the SCB group vs. the NSCB group among all patients ($19,326 vs. $22,020; p<0.0001); the youngest patient group’s costs were greater than the older groups at $31,518, $18,475 and $17,703, respectively (p<0.0001).Conclusions: In this analysis of commercial claims data, initial monotherapy with a SCB AED was associated with a greater proportion of patients receiving index monotherapy only, longer persistence, and lower total healthcare costs.Study Supported by:Research funded by Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc., Marlborough, MA.Disclosure: Dr. Pan has received personal compensation for activities with Sunovion Pharmaceuticals as an employee. Dr. Velez has received personal compensation for activities with Sunovion as an employee. Dr. Kozma has received personal compensation for activities with Health Services Research as a consultant. Dr. Kozma has received research support from Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc. Dr. Cramer has received personal compensation for activities with Sunovion as a consultant.