Economic impact of the use of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

OBJECTIVES: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP®) is a validated, risk-adjusted database for improving the quality and security of surgical care. ACS NSQIP can help participating hospitals target areas that need improvement. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature analyzing the economic impact of using NSQIP. This paper also provides an estimation of annual cost savings following the implementation of NSQIP and quality improvement (QI) activities in two hospitals in Quebec. METHODS: In June 2018, we searched in seven databases, including PubMed, Embase, and NHSEED for economic evaluations based on NSQIP data. Contextual NSQIP databases from two hospitals were collected and analyzed. A cost analysis was conducted from the hospital care perspective, comparing complication costs before and after 1 year of the implementation of NSQIP and QI activities. The number and the cost of complications are measured. Costs are presented in 2018 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: Out of 1,612 studies, 11 were selected. The level of overall evidence was judged to be of moderate to high quality. In general, data showed that, following the implementation of NSQIP and QI activities, a significant decrease in complications and associated costs was observed, which improved with time. In the cost analysis of contextual data, the reduction in complication costs outweighed the cost of implementing NSQIP. However, this cost analysis did not take into account the costs of QI activities. CONCLUSIONS: NSQIP improves complication rates and associated costs when QI activities are implemented.

Cost-Effectiveness of Housing First With Assertive Community Treatment: Results From the Canadian At Home/Chez Soi Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The At Home/Chez Soi trial for homeless individuals with mental illness showed scattered-site Housing First with Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) to be more effective than treatment as usual. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of Housing First with ACT and treatment as usual. METHODS: Between October 2009 and June 2011, a total of 950 homeless individuals with serious mental illness were recruited in five Canadian cities: Vancouver, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal, and Moncton. Participants were randomly assigned to Housing First (N=469) or treatment as usual (N=481) and followed up for up to 24 months. The intervention consisted of scattered-site Housing First, using rent supplements, with ACT. The treatment-as-usual group had access to all other services. The perspective of society was adopted for the cost-effectiveness analysis. Days of stable housing served as the outcome measure. Retrospective questionnaires captured service use data. RESULTS: Most (69%) of the costs of the intervention were offset by savings in other costs, such as emergency shelters, reducing the net annual cost of the intervention to about Can$6,311 per person. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was Can$41.73 per day of stable housing (95% confidence interval=Can$1.96-$83.70). At up to Can$60 per day, Housing First had more than an 80% chance of being cost-effective, compared with treatment as usual. Cost-effectiveness did not vary by participant characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Housing First with ACT appeared about as cost-effective as Housing First with intensive case management for people with moderate needs. The optimal mix between the two remains to be determined.

Cost-effectiveness of Housing First Intervention With Intensive Case Management Compared With Treatment as Usual for Homeless Adults With Mental Illness: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: In the At Home/Chez Soi trial for homeless individuals with mental illness, the scattered-site Housing First (HF) with Intensive Case Management (ICM) intervention proved more effective than treatment as usual (TAU). Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the HF plus ICM intervention compared with TAU. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is an economic evaluation study of data from the At Home/Chez Soi randomized clinical trial. From October 2009 through July 2011, 1198 individuals were randomized to the intervention (n = 689) or TAU (n = 509) and followed up for as long as 24 months. Participants were recruited in the Canadian cities of Vancouver, Winnipeg, Toronto, and Montreal. Participants with a current mental disorder who were homeless and had a moderate level of need were included. Data were analyzed from 2013 through 2019, per protocol. Interventions: Scattered-site HF (using rent supplements) with off-site ICM services was compared with usual housing and support services in each city. Main Outcomes and Measures: The analysis was performed from the perspective of society, with days of stable housing as the outcome. Service use was ascertained using questionnaires. Unit costs were estimated in 2016 Canadian dollars. Results: Of 1198 randomized individuals, 795 (66.4%) were men and 696 (58.1%) were aged 30 to 49 years. Almost all (1160 participants, including 677 in the HF group and 483 in the TAU group) contributed data to the economic analysis. Days of stable housing were higher by 140.34 days (95% CI, 128.14-153.31 days) in the HF group. The intervention cost $14 496 per person per year; reductions in costs of other services brought the net cost down by 46% to $7868 (95% CI, $4409-$11 405). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $56.08 (95% CI, $29.55-$84.78) per additional day of stable housing. In sensitivity analyses, adjusting for baseline differences using a regression-based method, without altering the discount rate, caused the largest change in the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio with an increase to $60.18 (95% CI, $35.27-$86.95). At $67 per day of stable housing, there was an 80% chance that HF was cost-effective compared with TAU. The cost-effectiveness of HF appeared to be similar for all participants, although possibly less for those with a higher number of previous psychiatric hospitalizations. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the cost per additional day of stable housing was similar to that of many interventions for homeless individuals. Based on these results, expanding access to HF with ICM appears to be warranted from an economic standpoint. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN42520374.

"What is the efficacy of specialised early intervention in mental health targeting simultaneously adolescents and young adults?'' An HTA.

OBJECTIVES: Current service organization is not adapted for youth with or at risk of mental illness. Access, engagement and continuity of care are notorious challenges, particularly during transition from adolescence to adulthood, when youths are transferred to adult services. An HTA was initiated to evaluate the efficacy of programs for which admission is not a function of the legal age of majority. METHODS: A systematic review of systematic reviews identified literature published between 2000 and 2017 in 4 databases. To be selected, studies had to focus on specialised mental healthcare early intervention (EI) programs targeting both adolescents and young adults. Contextual and experiential data were collected through interviews with local leading experts. Article selection and quality assessment using ROBIS were conducted with inter rater agreement. The analytical framework developed includes 4 domains: access, engagement and continuity, recovery as well as meaningfulness and acceptability. RESULTS: 1841 references were identified. Following inclusion/exclusion criteria, 5 studies were selected, 3 of which focused on EI for psyschosis. EI programs alone do not seem to decrease duration of untreated psychosis. EI including a multi focus campaign were more successful. EI does, however, seem to decrease hospitalisation for psychosis. The experience of service users and professionals with inter agency collaboration and person-centred care models were analysed to identify facilitating and inhibiting implementation factors. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare policies need to support further research and development of EI where admission is not a function of the legal age of majority and diagnostic, particularly for youths at risk.

Costs of services for homeless people with mental illness in 5 Canadian cities: a large prospective follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence on the costs of homelessness in Canada is available. We estimated the average annual costs, in total and by cost category, that homeless people with mental illness engender from the perspective of society. We also identified individual characteristics associated with higher costs. METHODS: As part of the At Home/Chez Soi trial of Housing First for homeless people with mental illness, 990 participants were assigned to the usual-treatment (control) group in 5 Canadian cities (Vancouver, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montréal and Moncton) between October 2009 and June 2011. They were followed for up to 2 years. Questionnaires ascertained service use and income, and city-specific unit costs were estimated. We adjusted costs for site differences in sample characteristics. We used generalized linear models to identify individual-level characteristics associated with higher costs. RESULTS: Usable data were available for 937 participants (94.6%). Average annual costs (excluding medications) per person in Vancouver, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montréal and Moncton were $53 144 (95% confidence interval [CI] $46 297-$60 095), $45 565 (95% CI $41 039-$50 412), $58 972 (95% CI $52 237-$66 085), $56 406 (95% CI $50 654-$62 456) and $29 610 (95% CI $24 995-$34 480), respectively. Net costs ranged from $15 530 to $341 535. Distributions of costs across categories varied significantly across cities. Lower functioning and a history of psychiatric hospital stays were the most important predictors of higher costs. INTERPRETATION: Homeless people with mental illness generate very high costs for society. Programs are needed to reorient this spending toward more effectively preventing homelessness and toward meeting the health, housing and social service needs of homeless people.

Housing First Impact on Costs and Associated Cost Offsets: A Review of the Literature.

OBJECTIVE: Housing First (HF) programs for people who are chronically or episodically homeless, combining rapid access to permanent housing with community-based, integrated treatment, rehabilitation and support services, are rapidly expanding in North America and Europe. Overall costs of services use by homeless people can be considerable, suggesting the potential for significant cost offsets with HF programs. Our purpose was to provide an updated literature review, from 2007 to the present, focusing specifically on the cost offsets of HF programs. METHOD: A systematic review was performed on MEDLINE and PsycINFO as well as Google and the Homeless Hub for grey literature. Study characteristics and key findings were extracted from identified studies. Where available, impact on service cost associated with HF (increase or decrease) and net impact on overall costs, taking into account the cost of HF intervention, were noted. RESULTS: Twelve published studies (4 randomized studies and 8 quasi-experimental) and 22 unpublished studies were retained. Shelter and emergency department costs decreased with HF, while impacts on hospitalization and justice costs are more ambiguous. Studies using a pre-post design reported a net decrease in overall costs with HF. In contrast, experimental studies reported a net increase in overall costs with HF. CONCLUSIONS: While our review casts doubt on whether HF programs can be expected to pay for themselves, the certainty of significant cost offsets, combined with their benefits for participants, means that they represent a more efficient allocation of resources than traditional services.