Literature DB >> 11151519

Benefit-cost analysis of residential and outpatient addiction treatment in the State of Washington.

M T French1, H J Salomé, A Krupski, J R McKay, D M Donovan, A T McLellan, J Durell.   

Abstract

A benefit-cost analysis of full continuum (FC) and partial continuum (PC) care was conducted on a sample of substance abusers from the State of Washington. Economic benefits were derived from client self-reported information at treatment entry and at 9 months postadmission using an augmented version of the Addiction Severity Index (ASI). Average (i.e., per client) economic benefits of treatment from baseline to follow-up for both FC and PC were statistically significant for most variables and in the aggregate. The overall difference in average economic benefit between FC and PC was positive ($8,053) and statistically significant, favoring FC over PC. The average cost of treatment amounted to $2,530 for FC and $1,138 for PC (p < .01). Average net benefits were estimated to be $17,833 (9.70) for FC and $11,173 (23.33) for PC, with values showing statistical significance (p < .05). Results strongly indicate that both treatment options generated positive and significant net benefits to society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11151519     DOI: 10.1177/0193841X0002400603

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eval Rev        ISSN: 0193-841X


  19 in total

1.  Benefit-cost analysis of addiction treatment: methodological guidelines and empirical application using the DATCAP and ASI.

Authors:  Michael T French; Helena J Salomé; Jody L Sindelar; A Thomas McLellan
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  Creating an aggregate outcome index: cost-effectiveness analysis of substance abuse treatment.

Authors:  Mireia Jofre-Bonet; Jody L Sindelar
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2004 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 1.505

3.  Cost-effectiveness of public sector substance abuse treatment: comparison of a managed care approach to a traditional public sector system.

Authors:  Martha C Beattie; Teh-Wei Hu; Rui Li; Jason C Bond
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2005 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 1.505

4.  Does the impact of managed care on substance abuse treatment services vary by provider profit status?

Authors:  Todd A Olmstead; Jody L Sindelar
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Benefit-cost in the California treatment outcome project: does substance abuse treatment "pay for itself"?

Authors:  Susan L Ettner; David Huang; Elizabeth Evans; Danielle Rose Ash; Mary Hardy; Mickel Jourabchi; Yih-Ing Hser
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.402

6.  The effect of substance abuse treatment on Medicaid expenditures among general assistance welfare clients in Washington state.

Authors:  Thomas M Wickizer; Antoinette Krupski; Kenneth D Stark; David Mancuso; Kevin Campbell
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.911

7.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of four interventions for adolescents with a substance use disorder.

Authors:  Michael T French; Silvana K Zavala; Kathryn E McCollister; Holly B Waldron; Charles W Turner; Timothy J Ozechowski
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  2007-06-28

Review 8.  Using administrative data for longitudinal substance abuse research.

Authors:  Elizabeth Evans; Christine E Grella; Debra A Murphy; Yih-Ing Hser
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-08-05       Impact factor: 1.505

9.  An experimental evaluation of recovery management checkups (RMC) for people with chronic substance use disorders.

Authors:  Michael Dennis; Christy K Scott; Rod Funk
Journal:  Eval Program Plann       Date:  2003-08

10.  Managing addiction as a chronic condition.

Authors:  Michael Dennis; Christy K Scott
Journal:  Addict Sci Clin Pract       Date:  2007-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.