Cost-effectiveness of care for people with psychosis in the community and psychiatric hospitals in the Czech Republic: an economic analysis

Background The absence of economic evidence hinders current reforms of hospital-based mental health systems in central and eastern Europe. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of discharge to community care for people with chronic psychoses compared with care in psychiatric hospitals in the Czech Republic. Methods We did a prospective study of people aged 18–64 years with chronic psychotic disorders in the Czech Republic who had been discharged into community services or were receiving inpatient psychiatric care for at least 3 months at baseline. We measured health-related quality of life with the EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire. Adjusting for baseline differences between the two groups, we assessed differences in societal costs in 2016 and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) during a 12-month follow-up, which we then used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). We did multiple sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of our results. Findings In our baseline case scenario, we included 115 patients who were either community service users (n=35) or inpatients (n=80) at baseline. The two groups were similar in terms of baseline characteristics. The annual QALY was 0·77 in patients receiving community care at baseline compared with 0·80 in patients in hospital at baseline (difference 0·03, 95% CI −0·04 to 0·10), but the costs of discharge to the community were €8503 compared with €16 425 for no discharge (difference €7922, 95% CI 4497–11 346), such that the ICER reached more than €250 000 per QALY. This ICER is substantially higher than levels that are conventionally considered to be cost-effective and the estimated probability that discharge to the community was cost-effective was very high (≥97%). None of the sensitivity analyses changed these results qualitatively. Interpretation This study provides economic evidence for deinstitutionalisation by showing that discharge to community care is cost-effective compared with care in psychiatric hospitals in the Czech Republic. These findings add to the human rights and clinical-based arguments for mental health-care reforms in central and eastern Europe

The economic cost of treatment-resistant depression in patients referred to a specialist service

Background: Patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) suffer very significant morbidity and are at a disadvantage concerning optimal clinical management. There are high associated societal costs. Aims: A detailed analysis of health economic costs in the United Kingdom in a group manifesting a severe form of TRD in the 12 months before their participation in a major randomized controlled treatment trial. Methods: The sample consisted of 118 participants from the Tavistock Adult Depression Study. Recruitment was from primary care on the basis of current major depression disorder of at least 2 years’ duration and two failed treatment attempts. Service utilization was assessed based on self-report and general practitioner (GP) medical records. Generalized linear models were used to identify predictors of cost. Results: All participants used GP services. Use of other doctors and practice nurses was also high. The mean total societal cost was £22 124, 80% of which was due to lost work and care required of families. Level of general functioning was found to be the most consistent predictor of costs. Conclusions: Severe forms of TRD are associated with high costs in which unpaid care and lost work predominate. Treatments that improve functioning may reduce the large degree of burden

Improving patient experiences of mental health inpatient care : a randomised controlled trial

Poorer patient views of mental health inpatient treatment predict both further admissions and, for those admitted involuntarily, longer admissions. As advocated in the UK Francis report, we investigated the hypothesis that improving staff training improves patients’ views of ward care.Cluster randomised trial with stepped wedge design in 16 acute mental health wards randomised (using the ralloc procedure in Stata) by an independent statistician in three waves to staff training. A psychologist trained ward staff on evidence-based group interventions and then supported their introduction to each ward. The main outcome was blind self-report of perceptions of care (VOICE) before or up to 2 years after staff training between November 2008 and January 2013.In total, 1108 inpatients took part (616 admitted involuntarily under the English Mental Health Act). On average 51.6 staff training sessions were provided per ward. Involuntary patient's perceptions of, and satisfaction with, mental health wards improved after staff training (N582, standardised effect −0·35, 95% CI −0·57 to −0·12, p = 0·002; interaction p value 0·006) but no benefit to those admitted voluntarily (N469, −0.01, 95% CI −0.23 to 0.22, p = 0.955) and no strong evidence of an overall effect (N1058, standardised effect −0.18 s.d., 95% CI −0.38 to 0.01, p = 0.062). The training costs around £10 per patient per week. Resource allocation changed towards patient perceived meaningful contacts by an average of £12 (95% CI −£76 to £98, p = 0.774).Staff training improved the perceptions of the therapeutic environment in those least likely to want an inpatient admission, those formally detained. This change might enhance future engagement with all mental health services and prevent the more costly admissions

Seclusion and Psychiatric Intensive Care Evaluation Study (SPICES) : Combined qualitative and quantitative approaches to the uses and outcomes of coercive practices in mental health services

BackgroundSeclusion (the isolation of a patient in a locked room) and transfer to a psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU; a specialised higher-security ward with higher staffing levels) are two common methods for the management of disturbed patient behaviour within acute psychiatric hospitals. Some hospitals do not have seclusion rooms or easy access to an on-site PICU. It is not known how these differences affect patient management and outcomes.ObjectivesTo (1) assess the factors associated with the use of seclusion and PICU care, (2) estimate the consequences of the use of these on subsequent violence and costs (study 1) and (3) describe differences in the management of disturbed patient behaviour related to differential availability (study 2).DesignThe electronic patient record system at one trust was used to compare outcomes for patients who were and were not subject to seclusion or a PICU, controlling for variables, including recent behaviours. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed (study 1). Nursing staff at eight hospitals with differing access to seclusion and a PICU completed attitudinal measures, a video test on restraint-use timing and an interview about the escalation pathway for the management of disturbed behaviour at their hospital. Analyses examined how results differed by access to PICU and seclusion (study 2).ParticipantsPatients on acute wards or PICUs in one NHS trust during the period 2008–13 (study 1) and nursing staff at eight randomly selected hospitals in England, with varying access to seclusion and to a PICU (study 2).Main outcome measuresAggression, violence and cost (study 1), and utilisation, speed of use and attitudes to the full range of containment methods (study 2).ResultsPatients subject to seclusion or held in a PICU were more likely than those who were not to be aggressive afterwards, and costs of care were higher, but this was probably because of selection bias. We could not derive satisfactory estimates of the causal effect of either intervention, but it appeared that it would be feasible to do so for seclusion based on an enriched sample of untreated controls (study 1). Hospitals without seclusion rooms used more rapid tranquillisation, nursing of the patient in a side room accompanied by staff and seclusion using an ordinary room (study 2). Staff at hospitals without seclusion rated it as less acceptable and were slower to initiate manual restraint. Hospitals without an on-site PICU used more seclusion, de-escalation and within-eyesight observation.LimitationsOfficial record systems may be subject to recording biases and crucial variables may not be recorded (study 1). Interviews were complex, difficult, constrained by the need for standardisation and collected in small numbers at each hospital (study 2).ConclusionsClosing seclusion rooms and/or restricting PICU access does not appear to reduce the overall levels of containment, as substitution of other methods occurs. Services considering expanding access to seclusion or to a PICU should do so with caution. More evaluative research using stronger designs is required.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme

Location of care for people with serious mental illness (LOCAPE) : implications for service use and costs using a mixed-methods approach

BackgroundThis study focuses on health care received by people with serious mental illness (SMI). The aim is to examine the economic implications of different locations of management of care and the views of service users and staff regarding services set up as alternatives to secondary care.ObjectivesSpecific objectives are to (1) identify people with SMI managed in primary or secondary care; (2) identify those who could be potentially transferred to primary care; (3) compare the characteristics of these groups; (4) compare service use and costs; (5) generate models to estimate cost changes following transfer between settings; (6) identify characteristics associated with time to transition to secondary care; (7) investigate experiences of patients receiving support from community-based interventions; and (8) assess the economic impact of interventions to facilitate transfer of care management.Methods(1) Quantitative component – using linked primary and secondary care data we examined differences between those discharged to primary care (n = 1410) and those still in secondary care (n = 1629). Service use and costs were compared and predictors of costs were identified using regression models. (2) Qualitative component – interviews following a topic guide were conducted at two time points with 31 people using and 10 people working in services set up as alternatives to secondary care. (3) Economic modelling – an analysis of the health-care costs of the above services compared with usual care was conducted using decision modelling. Data were obtained from local services where possible, and the time horizon was 12 months.Results(1) Quantitative component – characteristics of those discharged to primary care (n = 1410) were similar to those still in secondary care (n = 1629). Costs for those discharged to primary care were 48% lower than for those remaining in secondary care. Other variables strongly associated with costs were a history of violence and a diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Few patients in secondary care had a high probability of primary care management and, therefore, excess costs were only around £150,000 across the sample. (2) Qualitative component – service users’ views about a community options team and a primary care support service were positive and compared favourably to services used previously. Views about peer support were slightly less consistent. Staff had concerns with regard to caseload sizes and staff turnover. (3) Economic modelling – services to help transition had costs that were 40% of those for standard care. The results of this showed that triaging patients into these services would save £1578 over a 1-year period and that the results were robust to changes in most parameters.LimitationsAnalysis was hindered by the extent to which data were available. Qualitative analyses were limited by the fact that most of the participants did not have a SMI as usually defined and that many had been out of contact with secondary services for a long period of time.ConclusionsCosts are substantially lower in primary care than secondary care, even after controlling for service-user patient differences. Generally, there is satisfaction with services to help facilitate primary care provision and these appear to be cost saving. Future work should continue the analysis of linked data and involve a more comprehensive evaluation of the specific services investigated here.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme

Utility of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) in Predicting Mental Health Service Costs for Patients with Common Mental Health Problems : Historical Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: Few countries have made much progress in implementing transparent and efficient systems for the allocation of mental health care resources. In England there are ongoing efforts by the National Health Service (NHS) to develop mental health 'payment by results' (PbR). The system depends on the ability of patient 'clusters' derived from the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) to predict costs. We therefore investigated the associations of individual HoNOS items and the Total HoNOS score at baseline with mental health service costs at one year follow-up.METHODS: An historical cohort study using secondary care patient records from the UK financial year 2012-2013. Included were 1,343 patients with 'common mental health problems', represented by ICD-10 disorders between F32-48. Costs were based on patient contacts with community-based and hospital-based mental health services. The costs outcome was transformed into 'high costs' vs 'regular costs' in main analyses.RESULTS: After adjustment for covariates, 11 HoNOS items were not associated with costs. The exception was 'self-injury' with an odds ratio of 1.41 (95% CI 1.10-2.99). Population attributable fractions (PAFs) for the contribution of HoNOS items to high costs ranged from 0.6% (physical illness) to 22.4% (self-injury). After adjustment, the Total HoNOS score was not associated with costs (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.99-1.07). However, the PAF (33.3%) demonstrated that it might account for a modest proportion of the incidence of high costs.CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide limited support for the utility of the self-injury item and Total HoNOS score in predicting costs. However, the absence of associations for the remaining HoNOS items indicates that current PbR clusters have minimal ability to predict costs, so potentially contributing to a misallocation of NHS resources across England. The findings may inform the development of mental health payment systems internationally, especially since the vast majority of countries have not progressed past the early stages of this development. Discrepancies between our findings with those from Australia and New Zealand point to the need for further international investigations