Ned Potter is the science correspondent for ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson." He has reported on such topics as space exploration, the human genome and climate change.
RECENT POSTS
- Mars Rover: Stuck in the Mud
- Tranquility Base
- NASA's Ares 1-X Test: The View From Above
- The Yes Men
- The Missing Link -- Not
- Moon Crash Kicked Up Plume After All
- Moon Crash: Where's the Water?
- Green Apple: Firm is Latest to Leave U.S. Chamber of Commerce
- Recovery.gov: Your Tax Dollars at Work
- Climate: Power Companies Quit U.S Chamber of Commerce
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
The High Cost of Anguish
March 28, 2007 2:08 PM
It's quite possible that you know someone who has battled depression, or severe anxiety, or other psychiatric ills, and it's even more possible that you don't even know it, thanks to the power of medication.
A lot of Americans take pills today for psychiatric needs--in 2004, 24.8 million bought antidepressants, and 7.9 million took prescription medications for anxiety or insomnia.
Doubtless these medicines have saved pain, even lives. But they're costly, and a new report shows how quickly their use is growing.
The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, part of the Department of Health and Human Services, reports that expenditures for psychoactive medications grew 2.5 times from 1997 to 2004, from $7.9 billion to $20 billion.
Other points from the report:
--The sharpest increase was for antipsychotic agents, medications used to manage schizophrenia and other psychoses. They saw an increase from $1.3 billion to $4.1 billion from 1997 to 2004.
--Spending for central nervous system stimulants, to treat pain and control seizures, nearly tripled over the same time period, increasing from $0.6 billion to $1.7 billion.
--Spending on antidepressants more than doubled from 1997 to 2004, increasing from $5.1 billion to $12.1 billion, as did expenditures for anxiolytics, sedatives, and hypnotics for anxiety and sleep disorders. Spending for these drugs rose from $.9 billion to $2.1 billion.
--During the same time period, overall prescriptions for psychotherapeutic drugs increased from 141.9 million to 244.3 million; the number of people prescribed at least one such drug rose from 21 million to 32.6 million; and the average price per purchase increased from $55.80 to $82.00.
The full document is HERE. Thanks to Brian Hartman for the info.
March 28, 2007 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (11)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Whenever I see statistics like these, I'm always reminded of Orwell's description in his masterpiece "1984" of the use of soma. Fiction aside, as someone with a close friend who is bipolar, I've seen that these drugs can indeed work miracles to regulate the illness. On the other hand, I've also seen how expensive these drugs are, with a prescription running hundreds of dollars for the newer drugs. I wonder if a happy medium will ever be found between the drugs and their cost.
Posted by: chuck | Mar 28, 2007 3:47:19 PM
There's another aspect. Some drugs can cause other problems - Lithium, sometimes used for treatment of bipolar disease, can cause sever problems with the kidneys. Always something.
Posted by: Andy | Mar 29, 2007 10:48:21 AM
Careful there! There is enough misinformation about mental disorders floating around already.
Bipolar disorder is classified as a mood disorder, phychosis as a thought disorder. It is possible to have a manic episode with psychotic features, but this is rare, and it is usually not treated with antipsychotics (unless they are also hypnotics in lower doses, such as trifluoroperazine, but that is an old-fashioned treatment seldom used today).
The first line of attack is usually an SSRI opposed with an anxiolytic, including the non-benzodiazepine anxiolytic buspirone. Bipolar is also sometimes treated with neuroleptics such as gabapentin, suggesting that it might be related to seizure disorders.
BTW, Soma is from Brave New World, not 1984. There is also a muscle relaxant by the trade name of Soma.
Posted by: Eric Pepke | Apr 9, 2007 3:48:54 PM
Note from Ned--
Point well-taken, Eric, and I've removed the reference to bipolar disorders. I'm afraid it was copied straight from a summary of the AHRQ report, though, which I can't edit.
Posted by: Ned Potter | Apr 9, 2007 4:04:14 PM
Thanks, Ned. Fortunately, the MEPS Statistical Brief 163 to which you link doesn't seem to have this flaw.
Public reaction to bipolar has been curious. A decade ago it was almost trendy; now it seems particularly reviled. The last time I was on the Blue Cross/Blue Shield website looking for individual insurance, there was a specific question as to whether the applicant had ever been diagnosed as bipolar. A "yes" constitutes an automatic rejection, even if the disorder be controlled or have resolved itself (which does happen). Many insurance policies do not cover pre-existing conditions, but bipolar prevents one from getting any individual insurance. I then made contact with half a dozen insurance agents, and none of them could provide any sort of health insurance to anyone who had ever been diagnosed as bipolar.
Amidst much talk of the cost of insurance, I have never seen it mentioned that a substantial number of healthy people cannot obtain individual health insurance at any cost.
Posted by: Eric Pepke | Apr 10, 2007 12:07:31 PM
Re: Insurability if one has ever been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. What does one do if a relative (adult) was diagnosed with bipolar, without the following ever taking place: (1) demonstrating ANY of the signs/symptoms, or any combination of thereof, per DSM-IV standards; (2) being administered any proper and comprehensive diagnostic tests, complete physical examination(s), (eg. to rule out physiological illness, traumatic brain injury, toxic exposure, etc.), intensive interviewing and personal history data collection, family input, etc.; (3) addressing and treating any underlying problems, such as physiological illnesses, prescription medication side-effects and contraindications, multiple major losses, major stressors, and anxiety-producing/triggering situations/events/health conditions, etc.; and (4) educating and training the person and loved ones in "brain-related illnesses" (vs. highly-stigmatizing term, "mental illness)? How does a person reverse very negligent misdiagnoses, mistreatment, mismanagement, and mis-identification/labeling? Is it possible. By the way, it is very true that some persons do meet the criteria for bipolar disorder. They have been properly and carefully diagnosed. A prognosis has been made by a licensed and creditable MD/psychiatrist (vs. non-MD), very knowledgeable of and experienced with the disorder (and its multiple sub-classifications and sub-levels). And, a treatment plan, based on the above, has been presented to the person (consumer) and his/her family/caregivers - all of whom have agreed upon it, an essential FIRST STEP to recovery, wellness, and life management. But, for persons who DO NOT have bipolar and have been diagnosed with such - or any other "mental illness" (a very stigmatizing term), their chance of getting health care insurance is, in fact, very impossible. Unless you've just turned 65, qualify for Medicare Part A and B, and can't be turned down by Medicare Supplementary, Advantage Plan, and special insurance plan providers.
Posted by: SStepler | Apr 16, 2007 10:03:53 AM
Prayer in public schools are wrong, not wrong
Posted by: omnicef 300 mg side effects | Jun 27, 2007 8:37:41 PM
The school paddle is, is not an effective instrument to deal with bad students
Posted by: sleep sins | Sep 20, 2007 5:16:34 PM
Juvenile delinquents should be sentenced to bootcamp
Posted by: design engineering firm | Sep 25, 2007 8:52:10 PM
We are killing the rainforest
Posted by: health | Oct 24, 2007 8:52:56 PM
College education is a basic need today
Posted by: largegirlsxxx | Jan 4, 2008 2:51:23 AM
Post a comment
