AIMS: This study performs the first cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of Recovery Management Checkups (RMC) for adults with chronic substance use disorders. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized clinical trial of RMC. Participants were assigned randomly to a control condition of outcome monitoring (OM-only) or the experimental condition OM-plus-RMC, with quarterly follow-up for 4 years. SETTING:Participants were recruited from the largest central intake unit for substance abuse treatment in Chicago, Illinois, USA. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 446 participants who were 38 years old on average, 54% male, and predominantly African American (85%). MEASUREMENTS: Data on the quarterly cost per participant come from a previous study of OM and RMC intervention costs. Effectiveness is measured as the number of days of abstinence and number of substance use-related problems. FINDINGS: Over the 4-year trial, OM-plus-RMC cost on average $2184 more than OM-only (P < 0.01). Participants in OM-plus-RMC averaged 1026 days abstinent and had 89 substance use-related problems. OM-only averaged 932 days abstinent and reported 126 substance use-related problems. Mean differences for both effectiveness measures were statistically significant (P < 0.01). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for OM-plus-RMC was $23.38 per day abstinent and $59.51 per reduced substance-related problem. When additional costs to society were factored into the analysis, OM-plus-RMC was less costly and more effective than OM-only. CONCLUSIONS: Recovery Management Checkups are a cost-effective and potentially cost-saving strategy for promoting abstinence and reducing substance use-related problems among chronic substance users.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: This study performs the first cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of Recovery Management Checkups (RMC) for adults with chronic substance use disorders. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized clinical trial of RMC. Participants were assigned randomly to a control condition of outcome monitoring (OM-only) or the experimental condition OM-plus-RMC, with quarterly follow-up for 4 years. SETTING:Participants were recruited from the largest central intake unit for substance abuse treatment in Chicago, Illinois, USA. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 446 participants who were 38 years old on average, 54% male, and predominantly African American (85%). MEASUREMENTS: Data on the quarterly cost per participant come from a previous study of OM and RMC intervention costs. Effectiveness is measured as the number of days of abstinence and number of substance use-related problems. FINDINGS: Over the 4-year trial, OM-plus-RMC cost on average $2184 more than OM-only (P < 0.01). Participants in OM-plus-RMC averaged 1026 days abstinent and had 89 substance use-related problems. OM-only averaged 932 days abstinent and reported 126 substance use-related problems. Mean differences for both effectiveness measures were statistically significant (P < 0.01). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for OM-plus-RMC was $23.38 per day abstinent and $59.51 per reduced substance-related problem. When additional costs to society were factored into the analysis, OM-plus-RMC was less costly and more effective than OM-only. CONCLUSIONS: Recovery Management Checkups are a cost-effective and potentially cost-saving strategy for promoting abstinence and reducing substance use-related problems among chronic substance users.
Authors: Kathryn E McCollister; Christy K Scott; Michael L Dennis; Derek M Freitas; Michael T French; Rodney R Funk Journal: J Offender Rehabil Date: 2014-09-16