Managing complex patients on a medical psychiatric unit: an observational study of university hospital costs associated with medical service use, length of stay, and psychiatric intervention.

OBJECTIVE: Although there is a suggestion that the medical psychiatric unit (MPU) may reduce length of hospital stay (LOS), little is known about costs in terms of medical service use and psychiatric interventions in MPU care. METHOD: A record linkage study was conducted, linking cost data of hospital medical service use, LOS, and hospital psychiatric interventions to patients admitted to the MPU of the Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC) between 1998 and 2004. The data set was analyzed to enable comparison between cost changes of the same complex patient population following either MPU index admission or index admissions to reference MUMC medical wards. RESULTS: Comparisons revealed lower costs of medical service use in favor of the MPU (-euro104; 95% CI -euro174 to -euro35; P<.01). However, cost of psychiatric intervention and cost of LOS were higher after MPU admission (respectively, +euro165; 95% CI +euro25 to +euro305; P<.05; and +euro202; 95% CI +euro170 to +euro235; P<.001). Total costs were higher after MPU admission compared to medical ward admission (+euro263; 95% CI +euro68 to +euro458; P<.05). These differences were not moderated by somatic diagnosis or previous pattern of admissions. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that patients at the interface of psychiatric and somatic morbidity are diagnosed and treated adequately at the MPU, leading to a decrease in medical service use and an appropriate increase in exposure to psychiatric interventions. These results are specifically generalizable to MPUs with a focus on psychosomatic conditions, for instance, somatoform disorders or affective disorders with comorbid somatic diseases. However, failure to show cost savings in terms of LOS compared to medical wards outweighs cost-benefit derived from lower medical service use, suggesting that MPU activities may gain in cost-effectiveness if shifted more to outpatient psychosomatic care solutions.

The impact of differences in EQ-5D and SF-6D utility scores on the acceptability of cost-utility ratios: results across five trial-based cost-utility studies.

OBJECTIVE: This article investigates whether differences in utility scores based on the EQ-5D and the SF-6D have impact on the incremental cost-utility ratios in five distinct patient groups. METHODS: We used five empirical data sets of trial-based cost-utility studies that included patients with different disease conditions and severity (musculoskeletal disease, cardiovascular pulmonary disease, and psychological disorders) to calculate differences in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) based on EQ-5D and SF-6D utility scores. We compared incremental QALYs, incremental cost-utility ratios, and the probability that the incremental cost-utility ratio was acceptable within and across the data sets. RESULTS: We observed small differences in incremental QALYs, but large differences in the incremental cost-utility ratios and in the probability that these ratios were acceptable at a given threshold, in the majority of the presented cost-utility analyses. More specifically, in the patient groups with relatively mild health conditions the probability of acceptance of the incremental cost-utility ratio was considerably larger when using the EQ-5D to estimate utility. While in the patient groups with worse health conditions the probability of acceptance of the incremental cost-utility ratio was considerably larger when using the SF-6D to estimate utility. CONCLUSIONS: Much of the appeal in using QALYs as measure of effectiveness in economic evaluations is in the comparability across conditions and interventions. The incomparability of the results of cost-utility analyses using different instruments to estimate a single index value for health severely undermines this aspect and reduces the credibility of the use of incremental cost-utility ratios for decision-making.