Sleeping Sound Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD): Cost-Effectiveness of a Brief Behavioural Sleep Intervention in Primary School-Aged Autistic Children.

Disordered sleep is common in autistic children. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a brief behavioural sleep intervention, the 'Sleeping Sound intervention', in primary school-aged autistic children in Australia. A cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken alongside a randomised controlled trial over a 6-month follow-up period from both a societal and healthcare sector perspective. Resources used by participants were collected from a resource-use questionnaire and administrative data; intervention costs were determined from study records. Mean costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were compared between the intervention and treatment as usual (TAU) groups. Uncertainty analysis using bootstrapping and sensitivity analyses were conducted. The sample included 245 children, with 123 participants randomised to the intervention group and 122 to TAU. The mean total costs were higher for the Sleeping Sound intervention with a mean difference of A$745 (95% CI 248; 1242; p = 0.003) from a healthcare sector perspective and A$1310 (95% CI 584; 2035, p < 0.001) from a societal perspective. However, the intervention also resulted in greater QALYs compared with TAU, with a mean difference of 0.038 (95% CI 0.004; 0.072; p = 0.028). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was A$24,419/QALY (95% CI 23,135; 25,703) from a healthcare sector perspective and A$41,922/QALY (95% CI 39,915; 43,928) from a societal perspective; with a probability of being cost-effective of 93.8% and 74.7%, respectively. Findings remained robust in the sensitivity analyses. The Sleeping Sound intervention offers a cost-effective approach in improving sleep in primary school-aged autistic children.Trial registration The trial was registered with the International Trial Registry (ISRCTN14077107).

A systematic review of economic evaluations for opioid misuse, cannabis and illicit drug use prevention.

BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders negatively affect global disease burden. Effective preventive interventions are available, but whether they provide value for money is unclear. AIMS: This review looks at the cost-effectiveness evidence of preventive interventions for cannabis use, opioid misuse and illicit drug use. METHOD: Literature search was undertaken in Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit through EBSCOhost and EMBASE, up to May 2021. Grey literature search was conducted as supplement. Studies included were full economic evaluations or return-on-investment (ROI) analyses for preventing opioid misuse, cannabis and illicit drug use. English-language restriction was used. Outcomes extracted were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) or ROI ratios, with costs presented in 2019 United States dollars. Quality was assessed with the Drummond checklist. RESULTS: Eleven full economic evaluation studies were identified from 5674 citations, with all studies conducted in high-income countries. Most aimed to prevent opioid misuse (n = 4), cannabis (n = 3) or illicit drug use (n = 5). Modelling was the predominant methodology (n = 7). Five evaluated school-based universal interventions targeting children and adolescents (aged <18 years). Five cost-benefit studies reported cost-savings. One cost-effectiveness and two cost-utility analysis studies supported the cost-effectiveness of interventions, as ICERs fell under prespecified value-for-money thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: There are limited economic evaluations of preventive interventions for opioid misuse, cannabis and illicit drug use. Family-based intervention (ParentCorps), school-based interventions (Social and Emotional Training and Project ALERT) and a doctor's programme to assess patient risk of misusing narcotics ('the Network System to Prevent Doctor-Shopping for Narcotics') show promising cost-effectiveness and warrant consideration.

Interventions to prevent alcohol use: systematic review of economic evaluations.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol use is a leading risk factor for death and disability worldwide. AIMS: We conducted a systematic review on the cost-effectiveness evidence for interventions to prevent alcohol use across the lifespan. METHOD: Electronic databases (EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL and EconLit) were searched for full economic evaluations and return-on-investment studies of alcohol prevention interventions published up to May 2021. The methods and results of included studies were evaluated with narrative synthesis, and study quality was assessed by the Drummond ten-point checklist. RESULTS: A total of 69 studies met the inclusion criteria for a full economic evaluation or return-on-investment study. Most studies targeted adults or a combination of age groups, seven studies comprised children/adolescents and one involved older adults. Half of the studies found that alcohol prevention interventions are cost-saving (i.e. more effective and less costly than the comparator). This was especially true for universal prevention interventions designed to restrict exposure to alcohol through taxation or advertising bans; and selective/indicated prevention interventions, which involve screening with or without brief intervention for at-risk adults. School-based interventions combined with parent/carer interventions were cost-effective in preventing alcohol use among those aged under 18 years. No interventions were cost-effective for preventing alcohol use in older adults. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol prevention interventions show promising evidence of cost-effectiveness. Further economic analyses are needed to facilitate policy-making in low- and middle-income countries, and among child, adolescent and older adult populations.

Prevention of high body mass index and eating disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Eating disorders (EDs) and high body mass index (BMI) are two important public health issues with significant health and cost impacts. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to establish whether interventions are effective in preventing both issues. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched up to 10 May 2021. Studies were included if they were randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that evaluated a preventive intervention (regardless of its aim to prevent ED, high BMI or both) and reported both EDs and BMI-related outcomes. Both narrative synthesis and meta-analysis were used to synthesise the results. Publication bias was also investigated. RESULTS: Fifty-four studies were included for analysis. The primary aim of the studies was ED prevention (n = 23), high BMI prevention (n = 21) and both ED and high BMI prevention (n = 10). Meta-analysis results indicated that preventive interventions had a significant effect on several ED outcomes including dieting, shape and weight concerns, body dissatisfaction, negative affect, eating disorder symptoms and internalization, with effect sizes ranging from - 0.16 (95% CI - 0.27, - 0.06) to - 0.61 (95% CI - 0.29, - 0.04). Despite several studies that demonstrated positive impacts on BMI, there was no significant effect on BMI-related measures in the meta-analysis. The risk of publication bias was low for the majority of the pooled effect results. CONCLUSION: Preventive interventions were effective for either high BMI or EDs. However, there is limited evidence to show that current preventive interventions were effective in reducing both outcomes. Further research is necessary to explore the risk factors that are shared by these weight-related disorders as well as effective prevention interventions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I: systematic review.

Cost-effectiveness evidence of mental health prevention and promotion interventions: A systematic review of economic evaluations.

BACKGROUND: The prevention of mental disorders and promotion of mental health and well-being are growing fields. Whether mental health promotion and prevention interventions provide value for money in children, adolescents, adults, and older adults is unclear. The aim of the current study is to update 2 existing reviews of cost-effectiveness studies in this field in order to determine whether such interventions are cost-effective. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Electronic databases (including MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and EconLit through EBSCO and Embase) were searched for published cost-effectiveness studies of prevention of mental disorders and promotion of mental health and well-being from 2008 to 2020. The quality of studies was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies Instrument (QHES). The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (# CRD42019127778). The primary outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) or return on investment (ROI) ratio across all studies. A total of 65 studies met the inclusion criteria of a full economic evaluation, of which, 23 targeted children and adolescents, 35 targeted adults, while the remaining targeted older adults. A large number of studies focused on prevention of depression and/or anxiety disorders, followed by promotion of mental health and well-being and other mental disorders. Although there was high heterogeneity in terms of the design among included economic evaluations, most studies consistently found that interventions for mental health prevention and promotion were cost-effective or cost saving. The review found that targeted prevention was likely to be cost-effective compared to universal prevention. Screening plus psychological interventions (e.g., cognitive behavioural therapy [CBT]) at school were the most cost-effective interventions for prevention of mental disorders in children and adolescents, while parenting interventions and workplace interventions had good evidence in mental health promotion. There is inconclusive evidence for preventive interventions for mental disorders or mental health promotion in older adults. While studies were of general high quality, there was limited evidence available from low- and middle-income countries. The review was limited to studies where mental health was the primary outcome and may have missed general health promoting strategies that could also prevent mental disorder or promote mental health. Some ROI studies might not be included given that these studies are commonly published in grey literature rather than in the academic literature. CONCLUSIONS: Our review found a significant growth of economic evaluations in prevention of mental disorders or promotion of mental health and well-being over the last 10 years. Although several interventions for mental health prevention and promotion provide good value for money, the varied quality as well as methodologies used in economic evaluations limit the generalisability of conclusions about cost-effectiveness. However, the finding that the majority of studies especially in children, adolescents, and adults demonstrated good value for money is promising. Research on cost-effectiveness in low-middle income settings is required. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019127778.