The (cost-)effectiveness of early intervention (MBT-early) versus standard protocolized treatment (CBT) for emerging borderline personality disorder in adolescents (the EARLY study): a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although clinical guidelines prioritize the treatment of depression and anxiety in young persons, there is accumulating evidence that the presence of symptoms of borderline personality disorder (BPD) is associated with the limited effectiveness of these standard treatments. These findings stress the need for interventions addressing early-stage BPD in young people with presenting symptoms of anxiety and depressive disorders. The aim of this study is to investigate the (cost-)effectiveness of an early intervention programme for BPD (MBT-early) compared to first-choice psychological treatment for depression and anxiety according to Dutch treatment guidelines (CBT), in adolescents with either depression, anxiety, or both, in combination with early-stage BPD. METHODS: This study is a multi-centre randomized controlled trial. A total of 132 adolescents, presenting with either depression, anxiety, or both and significant BPD features will be randomized to either MBT-early or CBT. The severity of BPD, symptoms of depression and anxiety, personality, social and academic functioning, and quality of life will be assessed at baseline, end of treatment, and at 12-, 18-, and 24-month follow-up, along with medical costs and costs of productivity losses for cost-effectiveness analyses. DISCUSSION: This study will provide an empirical evaluation of the potential surplus value of early intervention in young people for whom treatment oriented at common mental disorders like anxiety and depression may be insufficient given their underlying personality problems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register, NL9569. Registered on June 15, 2021.

Unit Costs of Delinquent Acts for Use in Economic Evaluations.

BACKGROUND: Youth mental health interventions aimed at reducing substance use and delinquency in adolescents compete with other types of interventions for reimbursement from public funding. Within the youth mental health domain, delinquent acts impose high costs on society. These costs should be included in economic evaluations conducted from a societal perspective. Although the relevance of these costs is recognized, they are often left out because the unit costs of delinquent acts are unknown. AIMS OF THE STUDY: This study aims to provide a method for estimating the unit costs per perpetrator of 14 delinquent acts common in the Netherlands and included in self reported delinquency questionnaires: robbery/theft with violence, simple theft/pickpocketing, receiving stolen goods, destruction/vandalism of private or public property, disorderly conduct/discrimination, arson, cybercrime, simple and aggravated assault, threat, forced sexual contact, unauthorised driving, driving under the influence, dealing in soft drugs, and dealing in hard drugs. METHODS: Information on government expenditures and the incidence of crimes, number of perpetrators, and the percentage of solved and reported crimes was obtained from the national database on crime and justice of the Research and Documentation Centre of the Ministry of Justice and Security, Statistics Netherlands, and the Council for the Judiciary in the Netherlands. We applied a top-down micro costing approach to calculate the point estimate of the unit costs for each of the delinquent acts and, subsequently, estimated the mean (SD) unit costs for each of the delinquent acts by taking random draws from a triangular distribution while taking into account a 10% uncertainty associated with the associated point estimate. RESULTS: The mean (SD) unit costs per delinquent act per perpetrator ranged between EUR495 (EUR1.30) for "Driving under the influence" and EUR33,813 (EUR78.30) for a "Cybercrime". These unit costs may be considered as outliers as most unit costs ranged between EUR 2,600 and EUR 13,500 per delinquent act per perpetrator. DISCUSSION: This study is the first to estimate the unit costs per delinquent act per perpetrator in the Netherlands. The results of this study enable the inclusion of government expenditures associated with crime and justice in economic evaluations conducted from a societal perspective. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE: Youth mental health interventions aimed at reducing substance use and delinquency in adolescents are increasingly subjected to economic evaluations. These evaluations are used to inform decisions concerning the allocation of scarce healthcare resources and should cover all the costs and benefits for society, including those associated with delinquent acts. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: The results of this study facilitate economic evaluations of youth mental health interventions aimed at reducing substance use and delinquency in adolescents, conducted from a societal perspective. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Based on health-economic evaluations conducted in the field of youth mental health and the results of the current study, we recommend including the estimated unit costs in guidelines for health-economic evaluations conducted from a societal perspective. Future research could aim at examining whether these unit costs require regular updating. The methodology applied in this study allows for this.

Framework for modelling the cost-effectiveness of systemic interventions aimed to reduce youth delinquency.

BACKGROUND: Many interventions initiated within and financed from the health care sector are not necessarily primarily aimed at improving health. This poses important questions regarding the operationalisation of economic evaluations in such contexts. AIMS OF THE STUDY: We investigated whether assessing cost-effectiveness using state-of-the-art methods commonly applied in health care evaluations is feasible and meaningful when evaluating interventions aimed at reducing youth delinquency. METHODS: A probabilistic Markov model was constructed to create a framework for the assessment of the cost-effectiveness of systemic interventions in delinquent youth. For illustrative purposes, Functional Family Therapy (FFT), a systemic intervention aimed at improving family functioning and, primarily, reducing delinquent activity in youths, was compared to Treatment as Usual (TAU). "Criminal activity free years" (CAFYs) were introduced as central outcome measure. Criminal activity may e.g. be based on police contacts or committed crimes. In absence of extensive data and for illustrative purposes the current study based criminal activity on available literature on recidivism. Furthermore, a literature search was performed to deduce the model's structure and parameters. RESULTS: Common cost-effectiveness methodology could be applied to interventions for youth delinquency. Model characteristics and parameters were derived from literature and ongoing trial data. The model resulted in an estimate of incremental costs/CAFY and included long-term effects. Illustrative model results point towards dominance of FFT compared to TAU. DISCUSSION: Using a probabilistic model and the CAFY outcome measure to assess cost-effectiveness of systemic interventions aimed to reduce delinquency is feasible. However, the model structure is limited to three states and the CAFY measure was defined rather crude. Moreover, as the model parameters are retrieved from literature the model results are illustrative in the absence of empirical data. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE: The current model provides a framework to assess the cost-effectiveness of systemic interventions, while taking into account parameter uncertainty and long-term effectiveness. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: The framework of the model could be used to assess the cost-effectiveness of systemic interventions alongside (clinical) trial data. Consequently, it is suitable to inform reimbursement decisions, since the value for money of systemic interventions can be demonstrated using a decision analytic model. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Future research could be focussed on testing the current model based on extensive empirical data, improving the outcome measure and finding appropriate values for that outcome.