Kathryn E McCollister1, Michael T French. 1. Health Services Research Center and Department of Epidemiology and Public Health (D93), University of Miami, Miami, FL 33136, USA. kmccolli@med.miami.edu
Abstract
AIMS: This paper provides a focused summary of the relative contribution of addiction intervention outcomes to total economic benefit, based upon a compilation of published economic studies from the United States. DESIGN: The relevant literature was searched extensively, and 11 economic studies were selected for review. SETTING: The selected addiction interventions address both alcohol use/abuse and illicit drug use/abuse and represent various treatment modalities, including a brief physician intervention and long-term residential programs. PARTICIPANTS: Study participants included community-based drug users, pregnant and/or parenting women, problem drinkers, and criminal offenders. MEASUREMENTS: These studies estimated the economic benefits of an addiction intervention(s) in terms of one or more of the following outcome domains: criminal activity, health services utilization, employment earnings, and expenditures on illicit drugs and alcohol. FINDINGS: The primary finding of this review was that avoided criminal activity was the greatest economic benefit of addiction interventions and contributed more, as a separate outcome domain, to the total economic benefit of addiction interventions than any other outcome domain. Reduced utilization of health care services was also a noteworthy economic benefit of addiction interventions. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a detailed exposition of economic benefits estimation and highlights the potential impact of individual outcomes, thus providing a useful resource for substance abuse researchers and administrators as they design and evaluate future interventions.
AIMS: This paper provides a focused summary of the relative contribution of addiction intervention outcomes to total economic benefit, based upon a compilation of published economic studies from the United States. DESIGN: The relevant literature was searched extensively, and 11 economic studies were selected for review. SETTING: The selected addiction interventions address both alcohol use/abuse and illicit drug use/abuse and represent various treatment modalities, including a brief physician intervention and long-term residential programs. PARTICIPANTS: Study participants included community-based drug users, pregnant and/or parenting women, problem drinkers, and criminal offenders. MEASUREMENTS: These studies estimated the economic benefits of an addiction intervention(s) in terms of one or more of the following outcome domains: criminal activity, health services utilization, employment earnings, and expenditures on illicit drugs and alcohol. FINDINGS: The primary finding of this review was that avoided criminal activity was the greatest economic benefit of addiction interventions and contributed more, as a separate outcome domain, to the total economic benefit of addiction interventions than any other outcome domain. Reduced utilization of health care services was also a noteworthy economic benefit of addiction interventions. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a detailed exposition of economic benefits estimation and highlights the potential impact of individual outcomes, thus providing a useful resource for substance abuse researchers and administrators as they design and evaluate future interventions.
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
Authors: Carey J A Carr; Jiangmin Xu; Cristina Redko; D Timothy Lane; Richard C Rapp; John Goris; Robert G Carlson Journal: J Subst Abuse Treat Date: 2007-05-23
Authors: Eric P Slade; Elizabeth A Stuart; David S Salkever; Mustafa Karakus; Kerry M Green; Nicholas Ialongo Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2008-01-31 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: D Bishai; J Sindelar; E P Ricketts; S Huettner; L Cornelius; J J Lloyd; J R Havens; C A Latkin; S A Strathdee Journal: J Health Econ Date: 2007-12-05 Impact factor: 3.883