The cost-effectiveness of seven behavioural interventions to prevent drug misuse in vulnerable populations

Becky Pennington, Brendan Collins, Simon Leigh, Antony P Martin, Lesley Owen, Alastair Fischer, Harry Sumnall, Geoff Bates

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) developed a guideline on drug misuse prevention in vulnerable populations. Part of the guideline development process involved evaluating cost-effectiveness and determining which interventions represented good value for money.

METHODS: Economic models were developed for seven interventions which aimed to prevent drug use in vulnerable populations. The models compared the costs (to the health and crime sectors) and health benefits (in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) of each intervention and its comparator. Sensitivity analysis explored the uncertainty associated with the cost of each intervention and duration of its effect.

RESULTS: The reduction in drug use for each intervention partly offset the costs of the intervention, and improved health outcomes (QALYs). However, with high intervention costs and low QALY gains, none of the interventions were estimated to be cost-effective in the base case. Sensitivity analysis found that some of the interventions could be cost-effective if they could be delivered at a lower cost, or if the effect could be sustained for more than two years.

CONCLUSIONS: For drug misuse prevention to be prioritised by funders, the consequences of drug misuse need to be understood, and interventions need to be shown to be effective and cost-effective. Quantifying the wider harms of drug misuse and wider benefits of prevention interventions poses challenges in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of drug misuse prevention interventions. A greater understanding of the consequences of drug misuse and causal factors could facilitate development of cost-effective interventions to prevent drug misuse.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)42-50
Number of pages9
JournalInternational Journal of Drug Policy
Volume57
Early online date18 Apr 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2018

Keywords

  • Alcohol Drinking/prevention & control
  • Behavior Therapy/methods
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Drug Misuse/prevention & control
  • Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data
  • Humans
  • Models, Economic
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  • Smoking Prevention/economics
  • Vulnerable Populations/psychology

Cite this

The cost-effectiveness of seven behavioural interventions to prevent drug misuse in vulnerable populations. / Pennington, Becky; Collins, Brendan; Leigh, Simon; Martin, Antony P; Owen, Lesley; Fischer, Alastair; Sumnall, Harry; Bates, Geoff.

In: International Journal of Drug Policy, Vol. 57, 01.07.2018, p. 42-50.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Pennington, Becky ; Collins, Brendan ; Leigh, Simon ; Martin, Antony P ; Owen, Lesley ; Fischer, Alastair ; Sumnall, Harry ; Bates, Geoff. / The cost-effectiveness of seven behavioural interventions to prevent drug misuse in vulnerable populations. In: International Journal of Drug Policy. 2018 ; Vol. 57. pp. 42-50.
@article{81973acfb37a490cbe216368ec1fa0ea,
title = "The cost-effectiveness of seven behavioural interventions to prevent drug misuse in vulnerable populations",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) developed a guideline on drug misuse prevention in vulnerable populations. Part of the guideline development process involved evaluating cost-effectiveness and determining which interventions represented good value for money.METHODS: Economic models were developed for seven interventions which aimed to prevent drug use in vulnerable populations. The models compared the costs (to the health and crime sectors) and health benefits (in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) of each intervention and its comparator. Sensitivity analysis explored the uncertainty associated with the cost of each intervention and duration of its effect.RESULTS: The reduction in drug use for each intervention partly offset the costs of the intervention, and improved health outcomes (QALYs). However, with high intervention costs and low QALY gains, none of the interventions were estimated to be cost-effective in the base case. Sensitivity analysis found that some of the interventions could be cost-effective if they could be delivered at a lower cost, or if the effect could be sustained for more than two years.CONCLUSIONS: For drug misuse prevention to be prioritised by funders, the consequences of drug misuse need to be understood, and interventions need to be shown to be effective and cost-effective. Quantifying the wider harms of drug misuse and wider benefits of prevention interventions poses challenges in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of drug misuse prevention interventions. A greater understanding of the consequences of drug misuse and causal factors could facilitate development of cost-effective interventions to prevent drug misuse.",
keywords = "Alcohol Drinking/prevention & control, Behavior Therapy/methods, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Drug Misuse/prevention & control, Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data, Humans, Models, Economic, Quality-Adjusted Life Years, Smoking Prevention/economics, Vulnerable Populations/psychology",
author = "Becky Pennington and Brendan Collins and Simon Leigh and Martin, {Antony P} and Lesley Owen and Alastair Fischer and Harry Sumnall and Geoff Bates",
note = "Copyright {\circledC} 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.",
year = "2018",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.drugpo.2018.03.028",
language = "English",
volume = "57",
pages = "42--50",
journal = "International Journal of Drug Policy",
issn = "0955-3959",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The cost-effectiveness of seven behavioural interventions to prevent drug misuse in vulnerable populations

AU - Pennington, Becky

AU - Collins, Brendan

AU - Leigh, Simon

AU - Martin, Antony P

AU - Owen, Lesley

AU - Fischer, Alastair

AU - Sumnall, Harry

AU - Bates, Geoff

N1 - Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

PY - 2018/7/1

Y1 - 2018/7/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) developed a guideline on drug misuse prevention in vulnerable populations. Part of the guideline development process involved evaluating cost-effectiveness and determining which interventions represented good value for money.METHODS: Economic models were developed for seven interventions which aimed to prevent drug use in vulnerable populations. The models compared the costs (to the health and crime sectors) and health benefits (in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) of each intervention and its comparator. Sensitivity analysis explored the uncertainty associated with the cost of each intervention and duration of its effect.RESULTS: The reduction in drug use for each intervention partly offset the costs of the intervention, and improved health outcomes (QALYs). However, with high intervention costs and low QALY gains, none of the interventions were estimated to be cost-effective in the base case. Sensitivity analysis found that some of the interventions could be cost-effective if they could be delivered at a lower cost, or if the effect could be sustained for more than two years.CONCLUSIONS: For drug misuse prevention to be prioritised by funders, the consequences of drug misuse need to be understood, and interventions need to be shown to be effective and cost-effective. Quantifying the wider harms of drug misuse and wider benefits of prevention interventions poses challenges in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of drug misuse prevention interventions. A greater understanding of the consequences of drug misuse and causal factors could facilitate development of cost-effective interventions to prevent drug misuse.

AB - BACKGROUND: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) developed a guideline on drug misuse prevention in vulnerable populations. Part of the guideline development process involved evaluating cost-effectiveness and determining which interventions represented good value for money.METHODS: Economic models were developed for seven interventions which aimed to prevent drug use in vulnerable populations. The models compared the costs (to the health and crime sectors) and health benefits (in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) of each intervention and its comparator. Sensitivity analysis explored the uncertainty associated with the cost of each intervention and duration of its effect.RESULTS: The reduction in drug use for each intervention partly offset the costs of the intervention, and improved health outcomes (QALYs). However, with high intervention costs and low QALY gains, none of the interventions were estimated to be cost-effective in the base case. Sensitivity analysis found that some of the interventions could be cost-effective if they could be delivered at a lower cost, or if the effect could be sustained for more than two years.CONCLUSIONS: For drug misuse prevention to be prioritised by funders, the consequences of drug misuse need to be understood, and interventions need to be shown to be effective and cost-effective. Quantifying the wider harms of drug misuse and wider benefits of prevention interventions poses challenges in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of drug misuse prevention interventions. A greater understanding of the consequences of drug misuse and causal factors could facilitate development of cost-effective interventions to prevent drug misuse.

KW - Alcohol Drinking/prevention & control

KW - Behavior Therapy/methods

KW - Cost-Benefit Analysis

KW - Drug Misuse/prevention & control

KW - Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data

KW - Humans

KW - Models, Economic

KW - Quality-Adjusted Life Years

KW - Smoking Prevention/economics

KW - Vulnerable Populations/psychology

U2 - 10.1016/j.drugpo.2018.03.028

DO - 10.1016/j.drugpo.2018.03.028

M3 - Article

VL - 57

SP - 42

EP - 50

JO - International Journal of Drug Policy

JF - International Journal of Drug Policy

SN - 0955-3959

ER -