Cost-Effectiveness of Divalproex Versus Lithium
J Clin Psychiatry 1997;58:363 [letter]
© Copyright 2014 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.
Purchase This PDF for $40.00
If you are not a paid subscriber, you may purchase the PDF.
(You'll need the free Adobe Acrobat Reader.)
Receive immediate full-text access to JCP. You can subscribe to JCP online-only ($86) or print + online ($156 individual).
With your subscription, receive a free PDF collection of the NCDEU Festschrift articles. Hurry! This offer ends December 31, 2011.
If you are a paid subscriber to JCP and do not yet have a username and password, activate your subscription now.
As a paid subscriber who has activated your subscription, you have access to the HTML and PDF versions of this item.
Click here to login.
Did you forget your password?
Still can't log in? Contact the Circulation Department at 1-800-489-1001 x4 or send email
Letter to the Editor
Sir: We read with interest the recent application by Keck et
al. of pharmacoeconomic analysis to the treatment of bipolar
disorder. Their study suggested that divalproex was more costeffective
in treating mixed and rapid cycling manic states, that
lithium was more cost-effective in treating classic mania, and
that divalproex was more cost-effective when mixed, rapid
cycling, and classic mania were combined. Like Keck et al.,
we noted the sensitivity of the model to assumptions about
the length of stay (LOS) for divalproex versus lithium.