Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis of Recovery Management Checkups (RMC) for adults with chronic substance use disorders: evidence from a 4-year randomized trial.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

This study performs the first cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of Recovery Management Checkups (RMC) for adults with chronic substance use disorders.

Design

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized clinical trial of RMC. Participants were assigned randomly to a control condition of outcome monitoring (OM-only) or the experimental condition OM-plus-RMC, with quarterly follow-up for 4 years.

Setting

Participants were recruited from the largest central intake unit for substance abuse treatment in Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Participants

A total of 446 participants who were 38 years old on average, 54% male, and predominantly African American (85%).

Measurements

Data on the quarterly cost per participant come from a previous study of OM and RMC intervention costs. Effectiveness is measured as the number of days of abstinence and number of substance use-related problems.

Findings

Over the 4-year trial, OM-plus-RMC cost on average $2184 more than OM-only (P < 0.01). Participants in OM-plus-RMC averaged 1026 days abstinent and had 89 substance use-related problems. OM-only averaged 932 days abstinent and reported 126 substance use-related problems. Mean differences for both effectiveness measures were statistically significant (P < 0.01). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for OM-plus-RMC was $23.38 per day abstinent and $59.51 per reduced substance-related problem. When additional costs to society were factored into the analysis, OM-plus-RMC was less costly and more effective than OM-only.

Conclusions

Recovery Management Checkups are a cost-effective and potentially cost-saving strategy for promoting abstinence and reducing substance use-related problems among chronic substance users.

SUBMITTER: McCollister KE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3834076 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness analysis of Recovery Management Checkups (RMC) for adults with chronic substance use disorders: evidence from a 4-year randomized trial.

McCollister Kathryn E KE French Michael T MT Freitas Derek M DM Dennis Michael L ML Scott Christy K CK Funk Rodney R RR

Addiction (Abingdon, England) 20131009 12

<h4>Aims</h4>This study performs the first cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of Recovery Management Checkups (RMC) for adults with chronic substance use disorders.<h4>Design</h4>Cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized clinical trial of RMC. Participants were assigned randomly to a control condition of outcome monitoring (OM-only) or the experimental condition OM-plus-RMC, with quarterly follow-up for 4 years.<h4>Setting</h4>Participants were recruited from the largest central intake unit for ...[more]

PMID: 23961833

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPrimary care settings like federally qualified health centers (FQHC) are optimal locations to identify individuals with substance use disorders (SUD) and link them to SUD treatment, yet successful linkage has proven difficult. Recovery management checkups for primary care (RMC-PC) is a promising method for increasing linkage to care, engagement in treatment, and reducing substance use.MethodsParticipants (n = 266) who received screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) at four FQHC sites and needed SUD treatment were randomized to receive SBIRT only or SBIRT+RMC-PC. All participants received SBIRT prior to randomization as part of usual care while those in the experimental group also received quarterly checkups. All participants completed research interviews at enrollment and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-enrollment. The primary outcome was whether participants received any days of SUD treatment. Key secondary outcomes were days of SUD treatment (total and by SUD level of care), days of alcohol or drug abstinence, and a reduction in days of specific substance use, all based on self-report.ResultsRelative to participants receiving SBIRT only, participants assigned to SBIRT+RMC-PC were significantly more likely to have received any SUD treatment over 12 months (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 3.85) and more days of SUD treatment over 12 months (Cohen's effect size d = +0.41). The SBIRT+RMC-PC group also reported significantly more days of abstinence over 12 months (d = +0.30), fewer days of alcohol use (d = -0.20) and cannabis use (d = -0.20), and lower combined substance use frequency (d = -0.25). Days of treatment were found to positively mediate the direct effect of SBIRT+RMC-PC on days of abstinence.ConclusionThis study provides further evidence of the effectiveness of the "referral to treatment" component of SBIRT when combined with RMC for patients in primary care settings, including those with drug use problems. Moreover, results demonstrate the value of repeated checkups on longer-term treatment and substance use outcomes.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery pathways following total hip and knee arthroplasties. Secondary objectives were to report on quality of studies and identify research gaps for future work.DesignSystematic review of cost-utility analyses.Data sourcesOvid MEDLINE, Embase, the National Health Service Economic Evaluations Database and EconLit, January 2000 to August 2019.Eligibility criteriaEnglish-language peer-reviewed cost-utility analyses of enhanced recovery pathways, or components of one, compared with usual care, in patients having total hip or knee arthroplasties for osteoarthritis.Data extraction and synthesisData extracted by three reviewers with disagreements resolved by a fourth. Study quality assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list, the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research and Assessment of the Validation Status of Health-Economic decision models tools; for trial-based studies the Cochrane Collaboration's tool to assess risk of bias. No quantitative synthesis was undertaken.ResultsWe identified 17 studies: five trial-based and 12 model-based studies. Two analyses evaluated entire enhanced recovery pathways and reported them to be cost-effective compared with usual care. Ten pathway components were more effective and cost-saving compared with usual care, three were cost-effective, and two were not cost-effective. We had concerns around risk of bias for all included studies, particularly regarding the short time horizon of the trials and lack of reporting of model validation.ConclusionsConsistent results supported enhanced recovery pathways as a whole, prophylactic systemic antibiotics, antibiotic-impregnated cement and conventional ventilation for infection prevention. No other interventions were subject of more than one study. We found ample scope for future cost-effectiveness studies, particularly analyses of entire recovery pathways and comparison of incremental changes within pathways. A key limitation is that standard practices have changed over the period covered by the included studies.Prospero registration numberCRD42017059473.

Project description:Emergency physicians (EPs) are reported to have a higher rate of substance use disorder (SUD) than most specialties, although little is known about their prognosis. We examined the outcomes of emergency physician compared to other physicians in the treatment of substance use disorders in Physician Health Programs (PHP).This study used the dataset from a 5-year, longitudinal, cohort study involving 904 physicians with diagnoses of SUD consecutively admitted to one of 16 state PHPs between 1995 and 2001. We compared 56 EPs to 724 other physicians. Main outcome variables were rates of relapse, successful completion of monitoring, and return to clinical practice.EPs had a higher than expected rate of SUD (odds ratio [OR] 2.7 confidence interval [CI]: 2.1-3.5, p<0.001). Half of each group (49% of EPs and 50% of the others) enrolled in a PHP due to alcohol-related problems. Over a third of each group (38% of EPs and 34% of the others) enrolled due to opioid use. During monitoring by the PHPs, 13% of EPs had at least one positive drug test compared to 22% of the other physicians; however, this difference was not significant (p=0.13). At the end of the 5-year follow-up period, 71% of EPs and 64% of other physicians had completed their contracts and were no longer required to be monitored (OR 1.4 [CI: 0.8-2.6], p = 0.31). The study found that the proportion of EPs (84%) continuing their medical practice was generally as high as that of other physicians (72%) (OR 2.0 [CI: 1.0-4.1], p = 0.06).In the study EPs did very well in the PHPs with an 84% success rate in completion and return to clinical practice at 5 years. Of the 3 outcome variables measured, rates of relapse, successful completion of monitoring, and return to clinical practice, EPs had a high rate of success on all variables compared to the other physician cohort. These data support the conclusion that EM physicians do well following treatment of SUD with monitoring in PHPs and generally return to the practice of emergency medicine.

Project description:ImportanceAmong high-risk patients with hypertension, targeting a systolic blood pressure of 120 mm Hg reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality compared with a higher target. However, intensive blood pressure management incurs additional costs from treatment and from adverse events.ObjectiveTo evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of intensive blood pressure management compared with standard management.Design, setting, and participantsThis cost-effectiveness analysis conducted from September 2015 to August 2016 used a Markov cohort model to estimate cost-effectiveness of intensive blood pressure management among 68-year-old high-risk adults with hypertension but not diabetes. We used the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) to estimate treatment effects and adverse event rates. We used Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Life Tables to project age- and cause-specific mortality, calibrated to rates reported in SPRINT. We also used population-based observational data to model development of heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, and subsequent mortality. Costs were based on published sources, Medicare data, and the National Inpatient Sample.InterventionsTreatment of hypertension to a systolic blood pressure goal of 120 mm Hg (intensive management) or 140 mm Hg (standard management).Main outcomes and measuresLifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), discounted at 3% annually.ResultsStandard management yielded 9.6 QALYs and accrued $155 261 in lifetime costs, while intensive management yielded 10.5 QALYs and accrued $176 584 in costs. Intensive blood pressure management cost $23 777 per QALY gained. In a sensitivity analysis, serious adverse events would need to occur at 3 times the rate observed in SPRINT and be 3 times more common in the intensive management arm to prefer standard management.Conclusions and relevanceIntensive blood pressure management is cost-effective at typical thresholds for value in health care and remains so even with substantially higher adverse event rates.

Project description:BackgroundThe copper intrauterine device is the most effective form of emergency contraception and can also provide long-term contraception. The levonorgestrel intrauterine device has also been studied in combination with oral levonorgestrel for women seeking emergency contraception. However, intrauterine devices have higher up-front costs than oral methods, such as ulipristal acetate and levonorgestrel. Health care payers and decision makers (eg, health care insurers, government programs) with financial constraints must determine if the increased effectiveness of intrauterine device emergency contraception methods are worth the additional costs.ObjectiveWe sought to compare the cost-effectiveness of 4 emergency contraception strategies-ulipristal acetate, oral levonorgestrel, copper intrauterine device, and oral levonorgestrel plus same-day levonorgestrel intrauterine device-over 1 year from a US payer perspective.Study designCosts (2017 US dollars) and pregnancies were estimated over 1 year using a Markov model of 1000 women seeking emergency contraception. Every 28-day cycle, the model estimated the predicted number of pregnancy outcomes (ie, live birth, ectopic pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, or induced abortion) resulting from emergency contraception failure and subsequent contraception use. Model inputs were derived from published literature and national sources. An emergency contraception strategy was considered cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ie, the cost to prevent 1 additional pregnancy) was less than the weighted average cost of pregnancy outcomes in the United States ($5167). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and probability of being the most cost-effective emergency contraception strategy were calculated from 1000 probabilistic model iterations. One-way sensitivity analyses were used to examine uncertainty in the cost of emergency contraception, subsequent contraception, and pregnancy outcomes as well as the model probabilities.ResultsIn 1000 women seeking emergency contraception, the model estimated direct medical costs of $1,228,000 and 137 unintended pregnancies with ulipristal acetate, compared to $1,279,000 and 150 unintended pregnancies with oral levonorgestrel, $1,376,000 and 61 unintended pregnancies with copper intrauterine devices, and $1,558,000 and 63 unintended pregnancies with oral levonorgestrel plus same-day levonorgestrel intrauterine device. The copper intrauterine device was the most cost-effective emergency contraception strategy in the majority (63.9%) of model iterations and, compared to ulipristal acetate, cost $1957 per additional pregnancy prevented. Model estimates were most sensitive to changes in the cost of the copper intrauterine device (with higher copper intrauterine device costs, oral levonorgestrel plus same-day levonorgestrel intrauterine device became the most cost-effective option) and the cost of a live birth (with lower-cost births, ulipristal acetate became the most cost-effective option). When the proportion of obese women in the population increased, the copper intrauterine device became even more most cost-effective.ConclusionOver 1 year, the copper intrauterine device is currently the most cost-effective emergency contraception option. Policy makers and health care insurance companies should consider the potential for long-term savings when women seeking emergency contraception can promptly obtain whatever contraceptive best meets their personal preferences and needs; this will require removing barriers and promoting access to intrauterine devices at emergency contraception visits.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis of Recovery Management Checkups (RMC) for adults with chronic substance use disorders: evidence from a 4-year randomized trial.

Aims

Design

Setting

Participants

Measurements

Findings

Conclusions

Publications

Cost-effectiveness analysis of Recovery Management Checkups (RMC) for adults with chronic substance use disorders: evidence from a 4-year randomized trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets