Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading  Processing Request

Long-term cost-utility analysis of family therapy vs. treatment as usual for young people seen after self-harm

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • معلومة اضافية
    • Contributors:
      UCL - SSH/LIDAM/IRES - Institut de recherches économiques et sociales; UCL - SSS/IRSS - Institut de recherche santé et société
    • بيانات النشر:
      BioMed Central Ltd.
    • الموضوع:
      2024
    • Collection:
      DIAL@UCL (Université catholique de Louvain)
    • نبذة مختصرة :
      Background The joint evidence of the cost and the effectiveness of family-based therapies is modest. Objective To study the cost-effectiveness of family therapy (FT) versus treatment-as-usual (TAU) for young people seen after self-harm combining data from an 18-month trial and hospital records up to 60-month from randomisation. Methods We estimate the cost-effectiveness of FT compared to TAU over 5 years using a quasi-Markov state model based on self-harm hospitalisations where probabilities of belonging in a state are directly estimated from hospital data. The primary outcome is quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Cost perspective is NHS and PSS and includes treatment costs, health care use, and hospital attendances whether it is for self-harm or not. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are calculated and deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses are conducted. Results Both trial arms show a significant decrease in hospitalisations over the 60-month follow-up. In the base case scenario, FT participants incur higher costs (mean +£1,693) and negative incremental QALYs (-0.01) than TAU patients. The associated ICER at 5 years is dominated and the incremental health benefit at the £30,000 per QALY threshold is -0.067. Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis finds the probability that FT is cost-effective is around 3 − 2% up to a maximum willingness to pay of £50,000 per QALY. This suggest that the extension of the data to 60 months show no difference in effectiveness between treatments. Conclusion Whilst extended trial follow-up from routinely collected statistics is useful to improve the modelling of longer-term cost-effectiveness, FT is not cost-effective relative to TAU and dominated in a cost-utility analysis.
    • Relation:
      boreal:287811; http://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/287811
    • الرقم المعرف:
      10.1186/s12962-024-00546-z
    • الدخول الالكتروني :
      http://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/287811
      https://doi.org/10.1186/s12962-024-00546-z
    • Rights:
      info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
    • الرقم المعرف:
      edsbas.6D8C714