AIMS: The use of specialised services to avoid admission to hospital for people experiencing mental health crises is seen as an integral part of psychiatric services in some countries. The aim of this paper is to assess the impact on costs and cost-effectiveness of a crisis resolution team (CRT). METHODS:Patients who were experiencing mental health crises sufficient for admission to be considered were randomised to either care provided by a CRT or standard services. The primary outcome measure was inpatient days over a six-month follow-up period. Service use was measured, costs calculated and cost-effectiveness assessed. RESULTS:Patients receiving care from the CRT had non-inpatient costs pounds sterling 768 higher than patients receiving standard care (90% CI, pounds sterling 153 to pounds sterling 1375). With the inclusion of inpatient costs the costs for the CRT group were pounds sterling 2438 lower for the CRT group (90% CI, pounds sterling 937 to pounds sterling 3922). If one less day spent as an inpatient was valued at pounds sterling 100, there would be a 99.5% likelihood of the CRT being cost-effective. CONCLUSION: This CRT was shown to be cost-effective for modest values placed on reductions in inpatient stays.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: The use of specialised services to avoid admission to hospital for people experiencing mental health crises is seen as an integral part of psychiatric services in some countries. The aim of this paper is to assess the impact on costs and cost-effectiveness of a crisis resolution team (CRT). METHODS:Patients who were experiencing mental health crises sufficient for admission to be considered were randomised to either care provided by a CRT or standard services. The primary outcome measure was inpatient days over a six-month follow-up period. Service use was measured, costs calculated and cost-effectiveness assessed. RESULTS:Patients receiving care from the CRT had non-inpatient costs pounds sterling 768 higher than patients receiving standard care (90% CI, pounds sterling 153 to pounds sterling 1375). With the inclusion of inpatient costs the costs for the CRT group were pounds sterling 2438 lower for the CRT group (90% CI, pounds sterling 937 to pounds sterling 3922). If one less day spent as an inpatient was valued at pounds sterling 100, there would be a 99.5% likelihood of the CRT being cost-effective. CONCLUSION: This CRT was shown to be cost-effective for modest values placed on reductions in inpatient stays.
Authors: M Drukker; M Joore; J van Os; S Sytema; G Driessen; M Bak; Ph Delespaul Journal: Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci Date: 2012-05-22 Impact factor: 6.892
Authors: Brynmor Lloyd-Evans; Kate Fullarton; Danielle Lamb; Elaine Johnston; Steve Onyett; David Osborn; Gareth Ambler; Louise Marston; Rachael Hunter; Oliver Mason; Claire Henderson; Nicky Goater; Sarah A Sullivan; Kathleen Kelly; Richard Gray; Fiona Nolan; Stephen Pilling; Gary Bond; Sonia Johnson Journal: Trials Date: 2016-03-22 Impact factor: 2.279