The basics of economic evaluation in mental healthcare

Abstract

SummaryEconomic evaluation involves the comparative analysis of the costs and consequences of alternative (different) treatment options. Economic evaluations provide decision makers with information about the relative value for money, or cost-effectiveness, of various treatment programmes. The relative cost-effectiveness of new interventions is a key consideration in health technology assessments by the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and economic evaluations alongside randomised controlled trials are routinely requested by funders such as the National Institute for Health Research. This article outlines some of the key concepts and issues in the economic evaluation of mental healthcare.

Italian regional health service costs for diagnosis and 1-year treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents

“…Our cost analysis is relevant from the perspective of the Italian NHS not only for ADHD [ 27 ]. Indeed, the ADHD centre, the sender, and the time to diagnosis, but not the ADHD diagnosis itself, constitute cost drivers.…”

“…Subjects with mental health problems, including ADHD patients, require support from several dimensions in life, not only from the healthcare system, i.e. social care, housing, and employment [ 27 , 60 ]. Service utilization, outpatient care, and medications, however, are described as the main components of the economic impact of a disorder in mental health [ 3 ].…”

“…Studies on the economic burden of ADHD within Italy, where healthcare is provided to all citizens, are currently lacking [ 25 , 26 ]. An understanding of the costs associated with ADHD in children and adolescents is important for public policy makers as a rationale for improving and planning public services for both diagnosis and treatment [ 27 ].…”

Cost‐effectiveness of cognitive therapy as an early intervention for post‐traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents: a trial based evaluation and model

“…We recommend that readers unfamiliar with health economic methods refer to the following helpful primer papers designed for clinicians on economic evaluation ( Shearer & Byford, 2015 ) and economic modelling ( Petrou & Gray, 2011b ).…”

“…Once recovered from a single acute traumatic event, the risk of relapse is considered very low (Hong et al., ) and is not considered in the model. Costs and QALYs after the first year were discounted at the UK Treasury rate of 3.5% to reflect time preferences (Shearer & Byford, ). The model summed total costs and QALYs for each group over 2 years and 9 months which, added to the trial based costs and QALY data, provided the data for the cost‐utility analysis.…”