Literature DB >> 10974959

Cost-effectiveness of intensive v. standard case management for severe psychotic illness. UK700 case management trial. UK700 Group.

.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Intensive case management is commonly advocated for the care of the severely mentally ill, but evidence of its cost-effectiveness is lacking. AIMS: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of intensive compared with standard case management for patients with severe psychosis.
METHOD: 708 patients with psychosis and a history of repeated hospital admissions were randomly allocated to standard (case-loads 30-35) or intensive (case-loads 10-15) case management. Clinical and resource use data were assessed over two years.
RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found between intensive and standard case management in the total two-year costs of care per patient (means 24,550 Pounds and 22,700 Pounds, respectively, difference 1850 Pounds, 95% CI--1600 Pounds to 5300 Pounds). There was no evidence of differential effects in African-Caribbean patients or in the most disabled. Psychiatric in-patient hospital stay accounted for 47% of the total costs, but neither such hospitalisation nor other clinical outcomes differed between the randomised groups.
CONCLUSION: Reduced case-loads have no clear beneficial effect on costs, clinical outcome or cost-effectiveness. The policy of advocating intensive case management for patients with severe psychosis is not supported by these results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10974959     DOI: 10.1192/bjp.176.6.537

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Psychiatry        ISSN: 0007-1250            Impact factor:   9.319


  13 in total

Review 1.  Intensive case management for severe mental illness.

Authors:  Marina Dieterich; Claire B Irving; Bert Park; Max Marshall
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2010-10-06

2.  The UK700 trial of Intensive Case Management: an overview and discussion.

Authors:  Tom Burns
Journal:  World Psychiatry       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 49.548

3.  Model fidelity of assertive community treatment for clients with first-episode psychosis: a target group-specific application.

Authors:  M J M Verhaegh; I M B Bongers; H Kroon; H F L Garretsen
Journal:  Community Ment Health J       Date:  2008-10-16

4.  CHAMP: Cognitive behaviour therapy for health anxiety in medical patients, a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Peter Tyrer; Sylvia Cooper; Helen Tyrer; Paul Salkovskis; Mike Crawford; John Green; Georgina Smith; Steven Reid; Simon Dupont; David Murphy; Sarah Byford; Duolao Wang; Barbara Barrett
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2011-06-14       Impact factor: 3.630

Review 5.  Intensive case management for severe mental illness.

Authors:  Marina Dieterich; Claire B Irving; Hanna Bergman; Mariam A Khokhar; Bert Park; Max Marshall
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-01-06

6.  The interplay of outpatient services and psychiatric hospitalization among Medicaid-enrolled children with autism spectrum disorders.

Authors:  David S Mandell; Ming Xie; Knashawn H Morales; Lindsay Lawer; Megan McCarthy; Steven C Marcus
Journal:  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med       Date:  2012-01

7.  Community service models for schizophrenia: evidence-based implications and future directions.

Authors:  Marios Adamou
Journal:  Psychiatry (Edgmont)       Date:  2005-02

8.  Service and wider societal costs of very young children with autism in the UK.

Authors:  Barbara Barrett; Sarah Byford; Jessica Sharac; Kristelle Hudry; Kathy Leadbitter; Kathryn Temple; Catherine Aldred; Vicky Slonims; Jonathan Green
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2012-05

Review 9.  Effectiveness of quality improvement strategies for coordination of care to reduce use of health care services: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Andrea C Tricco; Jesmin Antony; Noah M Ivers; Huda M Ashoor; Paul A Khan; Erik Blondal; Marco Ghassemi; Heather MacDonald; Maggie H Chen; Lianne Kark Ezer; Sharon E Straus
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2014-09-15       Impact factor: 8.262

10.  Linking abuse and recovery through advocacy: an observational study.

Authors:  K Trevillion; S Byford; M Cary; D Rose; S Oram; G Feder; R Agnew-Davies; L M Howard
Journal:  Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci       Date:  2013-04-30       Impact factor: 6.892

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.