Karin M Vermeulen1, Daniëlle E M C Jansen2, Erik J Knorth3, Erik Buskens1, Sijmen A Reijneveld2. 1. Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Health Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Special Needs Education and Youth Care, University of Groningen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Behavioural problems are common among adolescents. The burden on society in social disturbance, health, failures to contribute and costs has triggered innovative community-based interventions such as multisystemic therapy (MST). AIMS: Our aim was to compare the cost-effectiveness of MST and treatment as usual (TAU). METHODS:Cost-effectiveness was assessed alongside a randomised clinical trial. One hundred and sixteen adolescents were allocated to MST or TAU. Follow-up lasted six months. Quality of life (EQ-5D) as perceived by the adolescents was the primary outcome. A societal perspective was used for cost assessment. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between groups in the small improvement experienced in quality of life (EQ-5D average score improvement in both 0.02 points, standard deviation 0.13 MST; 0.23 TAU). Dropout before follow-up was 48% and 69% respectively. Overall costs attributed to these young people were, however, 50% lower in the MST group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was 384,633€ (95% CI: -2,001,433 to 2,024,681€), which indicates dominance of MST over TAU. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Our study shows that, at worst, MST offers no advantage to young offenders in terms of their experienced quality of life, but 'TAU' included family focused intervention as well as standard supervision. There were some cost advantages for the individual and his/her family in the MST group, but substantial cost benefits for wider society. The case for a large, multi-centre, perhaps international trial is strong as widespread implementation of MST would benefit everyone if these findings are confirmed.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Behavioural problems are common among adolescents. The burden on society in social disturbance, health, failures to contribute and costs has triggered innovative community-based interventions such as multisystemic therapy (MST). AIMS: Our aim was to compare the cost-effectiveness of MST and treatment as usual (TAU). METHODS: Cost-effectiveness was assessed alongside a randomised clinical trial. One hundred and sixteen adolescents were allocated to MST or TAU. Follow-up lasted six months. Quality of life (EQ-5D) as perceived by the adolescents was the primary outcome. A societal perspective was used for cost assessment. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between groups in the small improvement experienced in quality of life (EQ-5D average score improvement in both 0.02 points, standard deviation 0.13 MST; 0.23 TAU). Dropout before follow-up was 48% and 69% respectively. Overall costs attributed to these young people were, however, 50% lower in the MST group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was 384,633€ (95% CI: -2,001,433 to 2,024,681€), which indicates dominance of MST over TAU. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Our study shows that, at worst, MST offers no advantage to young offenders in terms of their experienced quality of life, but 'TAU' included family focused intervention as well as standard supervision. There were some cost advantages for the individual and his/her family in the MST group, but substantial cost benefits for wider society. The case for a large, multi-centre, perhaps international trial is strong as widespread implementation of MST would benefit everyone if these findings are confirmed.
Authors: Janine V Olthuis; Patrick J McGrath; Charles E Cunningham; Michael H Boyle; Patricia Lingley-Pottie; Graham J Reid; Alexa Bagnell; Ellen L Lipman; Karen Turner; Penny Corkum; Sherry H Stewart; Patrick Berrigan; Kathy Sdao-Jarvie Journal: J Abnorm Child Psychol Date: 2018-11
Authors: Hester V Eeren; Lucas M A Goossens; Ron H J Scholte; Jan J V Busschbach; Rachel E A van der Rijken Journal: J Abnorm Child Psychol Date: 2018-07
Authors: Sharon Dijkstra; Hanneke E Creemers; Francisca J A van Steensel; Maja Deković; Geert Jan J M Stams; Jessica J Asscher Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-07-09 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Annemarieke Blankestein; Rachel van der Rijken; Hester V Eeren; Aurelie Lange; Ron Scholte; Xavier Moonen; Katrien De Vuyst; Jo Leunissen; Robert Didden Journal: J Appl Res Intellect Disabil Date: 2019-01-08