scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of a Problem-Solving Intervention Aimed to Prevent Sickness Absence among Employees with Common Mental Disorders or Occupational Stress

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (14) ◽  
pp. 5234
Author(s):  
Marijke Keus Van De Poll ◽  
Gunnar Bergström ◽  
Irene Jensen ◽  
Lotta Nybergh ◽  
Lydia Kwak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Sickness Absence ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Production Loss ◽  
The Cost

The cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness of a work-directed intervention implemented by the occupational health service (OHS) for employees with common mental disorders (CMD) or stress related problems at work were investigated. The economic evaluation was conducted in a two-armed clustered RCT. Employees received either a problem-solving based intervention (PSI; n = 41) or care as usual (CAU; n = 59). Both were work-directed interventions. Data regarding sickness absence and production loss at work was gathered during a one-year follow-up. Bootstrap techniques were used to conduct a Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) and a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) from both an employer and societal perspective. Intervention costs were lower for PSI than CAU. Costs for long-term sickness absence were higher for CAU, whereas costs for short-term sickness absence and production loss at work were higher for PSI. Mainly due to these costs, PSI was not cost-effective from the employer’s perspective. However, PSI was cost-beneficial from a societal perspective. CEA showed that a one-day reduction of long-term sickness absence costed on average €101 for PSI, a cost that primarily was borne by the employer. PSI reduced the socio-economic burden compared to CAU and could be recommended to policy makers. However, reduced long-term sickness absence, i.e., increased work attendance, was accompanied by employees perceiving higher levels of production loss at work and thus increased the cost for employers. This partly explains why an effective intervention was not cost-effective from the employer’s perspective. Hence, additional adjustments and/or support at the workplace might be needed for reducing the loss of production at work.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of referral for generic care or problem-solving treatment from community mental health nurses, compared with usual general practitioner care for common mental disorders

2006 ◽  
Vol 189 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony Kendrick ◽  
Lucy Simons ◽  
Laurence Mynors-Wallis ◽  
Alastair Gray ◽  
Judith Lathlean ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Community Mental Health ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Mental Health Nurses ◽  
Nurse Care ◽  
Gp Care ◽  
Community Mental Health Nurses

BackgroundUK general practitioners (GPs) refer patients with common mental disorders to community mental health nurses.AimsTo determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this practice.MethodRandomised trial with three arms: usual GP care, generic mental health nurse care, and care from nurses trained in problem-solving treatment; 98 GPs in 62 practices referred 247 adult patients with new episodes of anxiety, depression and life difficulties, to 37 nurses.ResultsThere were 212 (86%) and 190 (77%) patients followed up at 8 and 26 weeks respectively. No significant differences between groups were found in effectiveness at either point. Mean differences in Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised scores at 26 weeks compared with GP care were –1.4 (95% Cl –5.5 to 2.8) for generic nurse care, and 1.1 (–2.9 to 5.1) for nurse problem-solving. Satisfaction was significantly higher in both nurse-treated groups. Mean extra costs per patient were £283 (95% Cl 154–411) for generic nurse care, and £315 (183–481) for nurse problem-solving treatment.ConclusionsGPs should not refer unselected patients with common mental disorders to specialist nurses. Problem-solving should be reserved for patients who have not responded to initial GP care.

The Cost-Effectiveness of an RCT to Establish Whether 5 or 10 Years of Bisphosphonate Treatment Is the Better Duration for Women With a Prior Fracture

2009 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 678-689 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matt D. Stevenson ◽  
Jeremy E. Oakley ◽  
Myfawny Lloyd Jones ◽  
Alan Brennan ◽  
Juliet E. Compston ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Fracture Prevention ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Bisphosphonate Treatment ◽  
Net Benefit ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Term Efficacy ◽  
The Cost

Purpose. Five years of bisphosphonate treatment have proven efficacy in reducing fractures. Concerns exist that long-term bisphosphonate treatment may actually result in an increased number of fractures. This study evaluates, in the context of England and Wales, whether it is cost-effective to conduct a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and what sample size may be optimal to estimate the efficacy of bisphosphonates in fracture prevention beyond 5 years. Method. An osteoporosis model was constructed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of extending bisphosphonate treatment from 5 years to 10 years. Two scenarios were run. The 1st uses long-term efficacy data from published literature, and the 2nd uses distributions elicited from clinical experts. Results of a proposed RCT were simulated. The expected value of sample information technique was applied to calculate the expected net benefit of sampling from conducting such an RCT at varying levels of participants per arm and to compare this with proposed trial costs. Results. Without further information, the better duration of bisphosphonate treatment was estimated to be 5 years using the published data but 10 years using the elicited expert opinions, although in both cases uncertainty was substantial. The net benefit of sampling was consistently high when between 2000 and 5000 participants per arm were recruited. Conclusions. An RCT to evaluate the long-term efficacy of bisphosphonates in fracture prevention appears to be cost-effective for informing decision making in England and Wales.

scholarly journals Cost-effective Analysis of Proton Pump Inhibitors in Long-term Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Narrative Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 55 (5) ◽  
pp. 292-305
Author(s):  
Shazia Jamshed ◽  
Akshaya Srikanth Bhagavathula ◽  
Sheikh Muhammad Zeeshan Qadar ◽  
Umaira Alauddin ◽  
Sana Shamim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The Other ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽  
On Demand ◽  
Step Down ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Term Management

Background: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common gastrointestinal disorder that results from regurgitation of acid from the stomach into the esophagus. Treatment available for GERD includes lifestyle changes, antacids, histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs), proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), and anti-reflux surgery. Aim: The aim of this review is to assess the cost-effectiveness of the use of PPIs in the long-term management of patients with GERD. Method: We searched in PubMed to identify related original articles with close consideration based on inclusion and exclusion criteria to choose the best studies for this narrative review. The first section compares the cost-effectiveness of PPIs with H2RAs in long-term heartburn management. The other sections shall only discuss the cost-effectiveness of PPIs in 5 different strategies, namely, continuous (step-up, step-down, and maintenance), on-demand, and intermittent therapies. Results: Of 55 articles published, 10 studies published from 2000 to 2015 were included. Overall, PPIs are more effective in relieving heartburn in comparison with ranitidine. The use of PPIs in managing heartburn in long-term consumption of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) has higher cost compared with H2RA. However, if the decision-maker is willing to pay more than US$174 788.60 per extra quality-adjusted life year (QALY), then the optimal strategy is traditional NSAID (tNSAID) and PPIs. The probability of being cost-effective was also highest for NSAID and PPI co-therapy users. On-demand PPI treatment strategy showed dominant with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$2197 per QALY gained and was most effective and cost saving compared with all the other treatments. The average cost-effectiveness ratio was lower for rabeprazole therapy than for ranitidine therapy. Conclusion: Our review revealed that long-term treatment with PPIs is effective but costly. To achieve long-term cost-effective approach, we recommend on-demand approach to treat heartburn symptoms, but if the symptoms persist, treatment with continuous step-down therapy should be applied.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of an Obesity Management Program for 6- to 15-Year-Old Children in Poland: Data from Over Three Thousand Participants

Obesity Facts ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 487-498
Author(s):  
Ewa Bandurska ◽  
Michał Brzeziński ◽  
Paulina Metelska ◽  
Marzena Zarzeczna-Baran
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Obesity And Overweight ◽  
School Programs ◽  
Overweight Group ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Public Health Challenge ◽  
The Cost

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Obesity and overweight, including childhood obesity and overweight, pose a public health challenge worldwide. According to the available research findings, long-term interventions focusing on dietary behavior, physical activity, and psychological support are the most effective in reducing obesity in children aged 6–18 years. There are limited studies showing the financial effectiveness of such interventions. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> The objective of the present study was to evaluate cost-effectiveness of the 6-10-14 for Health weight management program using pharmacoeconomic indicators, i.e., cost-effectiveness analysis using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We used anthropometric data of 3,081 children included in a 1-year-long intervention with a full financial cost assessment. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The cost of removing a child from the overweight group (BMI &#x3e;85th percentile) was PLN 27,758 (EUR 6,463), and the cost of removing a child from the obese group (BMI &#x3e;95th percentile) was slightly lower, i.e., PLN 23,601 (EUR 5,495). Given the obesity-related medical costs calculated in the life-long perspective, these results can be considered encouraging. At the same time, when comparing the total costs per participant with the costs of other interventions, it can be noted that they are similar to the costs of school programs containing more than 1 type of intervention. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> The 6-10-14 for Health program can be considered cost-effective. As a result of committing financial resources in the approximate amount of EUR 1,790 per child, around half of the children participating in the program have improved their weight indicators.

scholarly journals Preventing sickness absence among employees with common mental disorders or stress-related symptoms at work: a cluster randomised controlled trial of a problem-solving-based intervention conducted by the Occupational Health Services

2020 ◽  
Vol 77 (7) ◽  
pp. 454-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marijke Keus van de Poll ◽  
Lotta Nybergh ◽  
Caroline Lornudd ◽  
Jan Hagberg ◽  
Lennart Bodin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Occupational Health ◽  
Sickness Absence ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Significant Group ◽  
Secondary Outcomes

ObjectivesCommon mental disorders (CMDs) are among the main causes of sickness absence and can lead to suffering and high costs for individuals, employers and the society. The occupational health service (OHS) can offer work-directed interventions to support employers and employees. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect on sickness absence and health of a work-directed intervention given by the OHS to employees with CMDs or stress-related symptoms.MethodsRandomisation was conducted at the OHS consultant level and each consultant was allocated into either giving a brief problem-solving intervention (PSI) or care as usual (CAU). The study group consisted of 100 employees with stress symptoms or CMDs. PSI was highly structured and used a participatory approach, involving both the employee and the employee’s manager. CAU was also work-directed but not based on the same theoretical concepts as PSI. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, at 6 and at 12 months. Primary outcome was registered sickness absence during the 1-year follow-up period. Among the secondary outcomes were self-registered sickness absence, return to work (RTW) and mental health.ResultsA statistical interaction for group × time was found on the primary outcome (p=0.033) and PSI had almost 15 days less sickness absence during follow-up compared with CAU. Concerning the secondary outcomes, PSI showed an earlier partial RTW and the mental health improved in both groups without significant group differences.ConclusionPSI was effective in reducing sickness absence which was the primary outcome in this study.

scholarly journals Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Candesartan Therapy in Comparison to Candesartan-Amlodipine Therapy on Hypertensive Outpatients

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (22) ◽  
pp. 3837-3840
Author(s):  
Faridah Baroroh ◽  
Andriana Sari ◽  
Noviana Masruroh
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Hypertension Therapy ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Cost

BACKGROUND: he achievement of optimal hypertension therapy requires cost-effective medicine. The treatment of hypertensive patients needs for long-term medication have made medical costs a prime issue in health economics. AIM: This study aims to determine the cost effectiveness of candesartan therapy compared to candesartan-amlodipine therapy on hypertensive outpatients. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study that compares candesartan therapy to candesartan-amlodipine therapy at a public hospital from payers’ perspective. The outcome is the percentage of targeted blood pressure decrease after three months of therapy. The cost effectiveness analysis uses the Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) based on the ratio of cost difference to the outcome in both therapy groups. RESULTS: As many as 111 patients participated in this research, comprising 40 candesartan therapy patients and 71 patients with the combination of candesartan-amlodipine. Of the participants, 63.96% were female, 57.66% were aged 60 or older, and 56.32% had diabetes mellitus as the most common complication. Results show that the average direct medical cost per patient for a therapy of three months with candesartan was IDR 1,050,536 ± 730,007 and IDR 760,040 ± 614,290 for a candesartan-amlodipine therapy. The mean decline of systolic and diastolic blood pressure under candesartan therapy is less than that of candesartan-amlodipine, although without any significant difference (p > 0.05). It follows that the effectiveness of candesartan (85%) is greater than that of the candesartan-amlodipine combination (84.50%). Candesartan therapy is thereby more cost-effective with an ICER value of IDR 580,993/%. CONCLUSION: Hypertension therapy by candesartan is more cost-effective than candesartan-amlodipine therapy with a cost addition of IDR 580,993.

A cost-benefit analysis for sonographic screening for renal tumors.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 665-665
Author(s):  
Shmuel Roizman ◽  
Moshe Leshno ◽  
Miki Haifler ◽  
Yishai Hode Rappaport ◽  
Amnon Zisman
Keyword(s):  
Targeted Therapy ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Screening Strategy ◽  
Renal Tumors ◽  
Stage Migration ◽  
Mathematical Framework ◽  
Abdominal Ultrasonography ◽  
The Cost

665 Background: In the last 2 decades, the rates of metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) at diagnosis declined from 33% to 17%This fact is attributed to massive penetration of cross sectional imaging leading to a marked stage migration. The cost of targeted therapy for metastatic RCC patients is very high. These trends led us to hypothesize that screening for RCC with ultrasound may be cost effective. Objective: To assess the cost effectiveness of screening with ultrasound for renal tumors in the general population over 60 years of age. Methods: Using the Markov model, a mathematical framework was set up describing the course of disease with and without screening for RCC using abdominal ultrasonography. Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) and financial costs were the outputs of the model. Results: Average costs for the screening strategy was 137.4 U$ and for non-screening was 31.4 U$. Screening and non-screening strategy would add an average of 21.7396 and 21.7385 QALY, respectively. An increase of 0.001 QALY equates to Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) of 86,4 U$ per QALY, Currently, the cost which is considered cost effective for 1 QALY point is approximately 27,548.21 U$. The two variables most influential on the model output were prevalence of RCC and US cost. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the sole cost benefit screening study performed for RCC in the targeted therapy era. Screening for renal tumors using abdominal ultrasonography at a cost of 35.81 U$ per exam is cost effective. Our findings are highly suggestive that early screening for RCC may be cost effective for preventing RCC metastatic disease and nevertheless will save lives.

Cost-Effectiveness of Posaconazole vs Fluconazole in the Prevention of Invasive Fungal Infections among Patients with Graft-Versus-Host Disease (GVHD) in the US.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 3336-3336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy K. O’Sullivan ◽  
Milton C. Weinstein ◽  
Ankur Pandya ◽  
David Thompson ◽  
Amelia Langston ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Graft Versus Host Disease ◽  
Fungal Infections ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Graft Versus Host ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Long Term Mortality

Abstract Trial data suggest that posaconazole is similar to fluconazole in preventing invasive fungal infections (IFIs) among allogeneic progenitor cell transplant recipients with graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). We estimated the cost-effectiveness of posaconazole versus fluconazole in this population in the US. A decision-analytic model was developed to estimate the average per patient treatment costs, IFIs avoided, life-years gained, and incremental cost per life-year gained of prophylaxis (2006 US$). The model extrapolates the trial results to a lifetime horizon to include long-term mortality due to GVHD. In the model, patients are assumed to receive posaconazole or fluconazole; efficacy data were obtained from the clinical trial. Long-term mortality and prophylaxis drug and IFI treatment costs were estimated from secondary sources. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. Posaconazole is associated with fewer IFIs (0.05 vs. 0.09), increased life years (7.87 vs. 7.66), and higher IFI-related costs (prophylaxis and IFI treatment) ($8,750 vs. $5,530) per patient relative to fluconazole. Costs for treatment of IFIs comprised 95% of the total cost for fluconazole and 35% for posaconazole. The incremental cost-effectiveness of posaconazole versus fluconazole is estimated to be $15,700 per life-year saved. Results are most sensitive to changes in the cost of treating an IFI and the efficacy of prophylaxis. Results from the probabilistic analysis indicate that there is an 88% probability that posaconazole is cost-effective at a $50,000 per life year saved threshold. We conclude that posaconazole is a cost-effective strategy for the prevention of IFIs in patients with GVHD.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of a physician-nurse supplementary triage assessment team at an academic tertiary care emergency department

CJEM ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 191-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivy Cheng ◽  
Maaret Castren ◽  
Alex Kiss ◽  
Merrick Zwarenstein ◽  
Mats Brommels ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Additional Patient ◽  
Patient Volume ◽  
Benefit Ratio ◽  
Cost Benefit Ratio ◽  
The Cost

ABSTRACTObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of physician-nurse supplementary triage assistance team (MDRNSTAT) from a hospital and patient perspective.MethodsThis was a cost-effectiveness evaluation of a cluster randomized control trial comparing the MDRNSTAT with nurse-only triage in the emergency department (ED) between the hours of 0800 and 1500. Cost was MDRNSTAT salary. Revenue was from Ontario’s Pay-for-Results and patient volume-case mix payment programs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was based on MDRNSTAT cost and three consequence assessments: 1) per additional patient-seen; 2) per physician initial assessment (PIA) hour saved; and 3) per ED length of stay (EDLOS) hour saved. Patient opportunity cost was determined. Patient satisfaction was quantified by a cost-benefit ratio. A sensitivity analysis extrapolating MDRNSTAT to different working hours, salary, and willingness-to-pay data was performed.ResultsThe added cost of the MDRNSTAT was $3,597.27 [$1,729.47 to ∞] per additional patient-seen, $75.37 [$67.99 to $105.30] per PIA hour saved, and $112.99 [$74.68 to $251.43] per EDLOS hour saved. From the hospital perspective, the cost-benefit ratio was 38.6 [19.0 to ∞] and net present value of –$447,996 [–$435,646 to –$459,900]. For patients, the cost-benefit ratio for satisfaction was 2.8 [2.3 to 4.6]. If MDRNSTAT performance were consistently implemented from noon to midnight, it would be more cost-effective.ConclusionsThe MDRNSTAT is not a cost-effective daytime strategy but appears to be more feasible during time periods with higher patient volume, such as late morning to evening.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document