Impact of reimbursement restrictions on the choice of antiepileptic drugs: Belgian Study on Epilepsy Treatment (BESET)

SummaryBackgroundIn Belgium, new and costly antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are only reimbursed as second-line treatment, after documented treatment with conventional and cheaper AEDs has failed. The objective of this study was to describe the treatment of epilepsy in Belgium and to analyze the impact of the reimbursement restrictions on the choice of AEDs.MethodsBetween May and June 2003, a sample of 100 neurologists, representative of the entire neurological community in teaching, academic, and regional hospitals in Belgium, were personally interviewed on the basis of a structured questionnaire (modified Rand method). The questionnaire contained questions on treatment choices and strategies in adult epilepsy.ResultsUnanimously, initial monotherapy was the preferred treatment strategy in all types of epilepsy. In the opinion of most neurologists, valproate was the first choice for idiopathic generalized and focal epilepsy with/without secondary generalization. Carbamazepine as their first choice for the treatment of focal epilepsy. New AEDs were most often prescribed as second-line therapy. Lamotrigine was the most frequently prescribed new AED and used for both generalized and focal epilepsy. It was followed by levetiracetam, topiramate and oxcarbazepine for focal epilepsy. In the absence of reimbursement restrictions, two new AEDs would be significantly more often prescribed as a first-line therapy: lamotrigine for idiopathic generalized epilepsy and oxcarbazepine for focal epilepsy.ConclusionsThe neurologists reached a high level of consensus on many of the key treatment questions. Monotherapy with valproate and carbamazepine was the standard treatment strategy in Belgium. Lamotrigine and less so levetiracetam, topiramate and oxcarbazepine were commonly prescribed as second-line AEDs. In the absence of reimbursement restrictions, lamotrigine and oxcarbazepine would be more frequently prescribed.