Paul McCrone1, Tom K J Craig, Paddy Power, Philippa A Garety. 1. Centre for the Economics of Mental Health, PO 24, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, London SE5 8AF, UK. p.mccrone@iop.kcl.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is concern that delaying treatment for psychosis may have a negative impact on its long-term course. A number of countries have developed early intervention teams but there is limited evidence regarding their cost-effectiveness. AIMS: To compare the costs and cost-effectiveness of an early intervention service in London with standard care. METHOD:Individuals in their first episode of psychosis (or those who had previously discontinued treatment) were recruited to the study. Clinical variables and costs were measured at baseline and then at 6- and 18-month follow-up. Information on quality of life and vocational outcomes were combined with costs to assess cost-effectiveness. RESULTS:A total of 144 people were randomised. Total mean costs were 11,685 pounds sterling in the early intervention group and 14,062 pounds sterling in the standard care group, with the difference not being significant (95% CI -8128 pounds sterling to 3326 pounds sterling). When costs were combined with improved vocational and quality of life outcomes it was shown that early intervention would have a very high likelihood of being cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Early intervention did not increase costs and was highly likely to be cost-effective when compared with standard care.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: There is concern that delaying treatment for psychosis may have a negative impact on its long-term course. A number of countries have developed early intervention teams but there is limited evidence regarding their cost-effectiveness. AIMS: To compare the costs and cost-effectiveness of an early intervention service in London with standard care. METHOD: Individuals in their first episode of psychosis (or those who had previously discontinued treatment) were recruited to the study. Clinical variables and costs were measured at baseline and then at 6- and 18-month follow-up. Information on quality of life and vocational outcomes were combined with costs to assess cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: A total of 144 people were randomised. Total mean costs were 11,685 pounds sterling in the early intervention group and 14,062 pounds sterling in the standard care group, with the difference not being significant (95% CI -8128 pounds sterling to 3326 pounds sterling). When costs were combined with improved vocational and quality of life outcomes it was shown that early intervention would have a very high likelihood of being cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Early intervention did not increase costs and was highly likely to be cost-effective when compared with standard care.
Authors: Kelly K Anderson; Aristotle Voineskos; Benoit H Mulsant; Tony P George; Kwame J Mckenzie Journal: Can J Psychiatry Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 4.356
Authors: Ashok Malla; Ridha Joober; Srividya Iyer; Ross Norman; Norbert Schmitz; Thomas Brown; Danyael Lutgens; Eric Jarvis; Howard C Margolese; Nicola Casacalenda; Amal Abdel-Baki; Eric Latimer; Sally Mustafa; Sherezad Abadi Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 49.548
Authors: Delbert G Robinson; Nina R Schooler; Robert A Rosenheck; Haiqun Lin; Kyaw J Sint; Patricia Marcy; John M Kane Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2019-05-14 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Pablo A Gaspar; Rolando I Castillo; Alejandro Maturana; María J Villar; Karen Ulloa; Gabriel González; Osvaldo Ibaceta; Andrea Ortiz; Sebastián Corral; Rocío Mayol; Valeria De Angel; María B Aburto; Antígona Martínez; Cheryl M Corcoran; Hernán Silva Journal: Early Interv Psychiatry Date: 2018-12-11 Impact factor: 2.732
Authors: Michael Groff; Eric Latimer; Ridha Joober; Srividya N Iyer; Norbert Schmitz; Sherezad Abadi; Amal Abdel-Baki; Nicola Casacalenda; Howard C Margolese; G Eric Jarvis; Ashok Malla Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2021-03-16 Impact factor: 9.306