Literature DB >> 12444359

Benefit-cost analysis of addiction treatment in Arkansas: specialty and standard residential programs for pregnant and parenting women.

Michael T French1, Kathryn E McCollister, John Cacciola, Jack Durell, Raymond L Stephens.   

Abstract

A benefit-cost analysis of specialty residential treatment (Specialty) and standard residential treatment (Standard) was conducted on a sample of pregnant and parenting substance abusers from Arkansas. Economic benefits were derived from client self-reported information at treatment entry and at 6-month postdischarge with the use of an augmented version of the Addiction Severity Index (ASI). The average cost of treatment in Specialty programs was US dollars 8035 versus US dollars 1467 for Standard residential treatment. Average net benefits (benefit-cost ratios) were estimated to be US dollars 17144 (3.1) for Specialty and US dollars 8090 (6.5) for Standard. The main policy implication of this research is that investment in Specialty residential treatment for pregnant and parenting substance-abusing women appears to be economically justified, but future evaluations should analyze larger and more comparable samples to improve power and precision in the benefit-cost statistics.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12444359     DOI: 10.1080/08897070209511473

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Subst Abus        ISSN: 0889-7077            Impact factor:   3.716


  13 in total

1.  Alcohol use and crime: findings from a longitudinal sample of U.S. adolescents and young adults.

Authors:  Ioana Popovici; Jenny F Homer; Hai Fang; Michael T French
Journal:  Alcohol Clin Exp Res       Date:  2011-12-14       Impact factor: 3.455

2.  Substance abuse treatment for women: changes in the settings where women received treatment and types of services provided, 1987-1998.

Authors:  Christine E Grella; Lisa Greenwell
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2004 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 1.505

3.  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

4.  Cost-effectiveness of individual versus group female-specific cognitive behavioral therapy for alcohol use disorder.

Authors:  Todd A Olmstead; Fiona S Graff; Alyssa Ames-Sikora; Barbara S McCrady; Ayorkor Gaba; Elizabeth E Epstein
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  2019-02-07

5.  ENHANCING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSING PREGNANT AND PARENTING WOMEN: FOCUS ON MATERNAL REFLECTIVE FUNCTIONING AND MOTHER-CHILD RELATIONSHIP.

Authors:  Marjukka Pajulo; Nancy Suchman; Mirjam Kalland; Linda Mayes
Journal:  Infant Ment Health J       Date:  2006-09-01

6.  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

7.  Patient and program costs, and outcomes, of including gender-sensitive services in intensive inpatient programs for substance use.

Authors:  Sarah E Hornack; Brian T Yates
Journal:  Eval Program Plann       Date:  2017-09-01

Review 8.  Economic evaluation of interventions to treat opiate dependence : a review of the evidence.

Authors:  Christopher M Doran
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  The cost of crime to society: new crime-specific estimates for policy and program evaluation.

Authors:  Kathryn E McCollister; Michael T French; Hai Fang
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2010-01-13       Impact factor: 4.492

10.  Measuring the costs of outreach motivational interviewing for smoking cessation and relapse prevention among low-income pregnant women.

Authors:  Jennifer Prah Ruger; Karen M Emmons; Margaret H Kearney; Milton C Weinstein
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2009-09-23       Impact factor: 3.007

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.