A dynamic Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Kidney Team at Home intervention in The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: The Kidney Team at Home program is an educational intervention aimed at patients with chronic kidney disease to assist them in their choice for kidney replacement therapy. Previous studies have shown that the intervention results in an increase in knowledge and communication on kidney replacement therapy, and eventually in an increase in the number of living donor kidney transplantations. The study assesses the cost-effectiveness of the intervention compared to standard care. METHODS: A dynamic probabilistic Markov model was used to estimate the monetary and health benefits of the intervention in The Netherlands over 10 years. Data on costs and health-related quality of life were derived from the literature. Transition probabilities, prevalence, and incidence rates were calculated using a large national database. An optimistic and a pessimistic implementation scenario were compared to a base case scenario with standard care. RESULTS: In both the optimistic and pessimistic scenario, the intervention is cost-effective and dominant compared to standard care: savings were €108,681,985 and €51,770,060 and the benefits were 1382 and 695 QALYs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The superior cost-effectiveness of the intervention is caused by the superior health effects and the reduction of costs associated with transplantation, and the relatively small incremental costs of the intervention. The favorable findings of this implementation project resulted in national uptake of the intervention in The Netherlands as of 2021. This is the first time a psychosocial intervention has been implemented as part of standard care in a kidney replacement therapy program worldwide.

Day hospital versus intensive out-patient mentalisation-based treatment for borderline personality disorder: multicentre randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Two types of mentalisation-based treatment (MBT) have been developed and empirically evaluated for borderline personality disorder (BPD): day hospital MBT (MBT-DH) and intensive out-patient MBT (MBT-IOP). No trial has yet compared their efficacy. AIMS: To compare the efficacy of MBT-DH and MBT-IOP 18 months after start of treatment. MBT-DH was hypothesised to be superior to MBT-IOP because of its higher treatment intensity. METHOD: In a multicentre randomised controlled trial (Nederlands Trial Register: NTR2292) conducted at three sites in the Netherlands, patients with BPD were randomly assigned to MBT-DH (n = 70) or MBT-IOP (n = 44). The primary outcome was symptom severity (Brief Symptom Inventory). Secondary outcome measures included borderline symptomatology, personality functioning, interpersonal functioning, quality of life and self-harm. Patients were assessed every 6 months from baseline to 18 months after start of treatment. Data were analysed using multilevel modelling based on intention-to-treat principles. RESULTS: Significant improvements were found on all outcome measures, with moderate to very large effect sizes for both groups. MBT-DH was not superior to MBT-IOP on the primary outcome measure, but MBT-DH showed a clear tendency towards superiority on secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Although MBT-DH was not superior to MBT-IOP on the primary outcome measure despite its greater treatment intensity, MBT-DH showed a tendency to be more effective on secondary outcomes, particularly in terms of relational functioning. Patients receiving MBT-DH and MBT-IOP, thus, seem to follow different trajectories of change, which may have important implications for clinical decision-making. Longer-term follow-up and cost-effectiveness considerations may ultimately determine the optimal intensity of specialised treatments such as MBT for patients with BPD.

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.

Evaluating the effects of multisystemic therapy for adolescents with intellectual disabilities and antisocial or delinquent behaviour and their parents.

BACKGROUND: An adaptation of multisystemic therapy (MST) was piloted to find out whether it would yield better outcomes than standard MST in families where the adolescent not only shows antisocial or delinquent behaviour, but also has an intellectual disability. METHOD: To establish the comparative effectiveness of MST-ID (n = 55) versus standard MST (n = 73), treatment outcomes were compared at the end of treatment and at 6-month follow-up. Pre-treatment differences were controlled for using the propensity score method. RESULTS: Multisystemic therapy-ID resulted in reduced police contact and reduced rule breaking behaviour that lasted up to 6 months post-treatment. Compared to standard MST, MST-ID more frequently resulted in improvements in parenting skills, family relations, social support, involvement with pro-social peers and sustained positive behavioural changes. At follow-up, more adolescents who had received MST-ID were still living at home. CONCLUSIONS: These results support further development of and research into the MST-ID adaptation.

Multisystemic Therapy and Functional Family Therapy Compared on their Effectiveness Using the Propensity Score Method.

Multisystemic Therapy (MST) and Functional Family Therapy (FFT) have overlapping target populations and treatment goals. In this study, these interventions were compared on their effectiveness using a quasi-experimental design. Between October, 2009 and June, 2014, outcome data were collected from 697 adolescents (mean age 15.3 (SD 1.48), 61.9% male) assigned to either MST or FFT (422 MST; 275 FFT). Data were gathered during Routine Outcome Monitoring. The primary outcome was externalizing problem behavior (Child Behavior Checklist and Youth Self Report). Secondary outcomes were the proportion of adolescents living at home, engaged in school or work, and who lacked police contact during treatment. Because of the non-random assignment, a propensity score method was used to control for observed pre-treatment differences. Because the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model guided treatment assignment, effectiveness was also estimated in youth with and without a court order as an indicator of their risk level. Looking at the whole sample, no difference in effect was found with regard to externalizing problems. For adolescents without a court order, effects on externalizing problems were larger after MST. Because many more adolescents with a court order were assigned to MST compared to FFT, the propensity score method could not balance the treatment groups in this subsample. In conclusion, few differences between MST and FFT were found. In line with the RNR model, higher risk adolescents were assigned to the more intensive treatment, namely MST. In the group with lower risk adolescents, this more intensive treatment was more effective in reducing externalizing problems.

The burden of disease in patients eligible for mentalization-based treatment (MBT): quality of life and costs.

BACKGROUND: Mentalization-Based Treatment (MBT) is a promising, though expensive treatment for severely ill patients with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). A high burden of disease in terms of quality of life (QoL) and life years lost can be a reason to prioritize mental health interventions, and specifically for BPD patients. Moreover, when the societal costs of the illness are high, spending resources on high treatment costs would be more easily legitimized. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to calculate the burden of disease of BPD patients eligible for MBT. METHODS: The 403 patients included in this study were recruited from two mental health care institutes in the Netherlands. All patients were eligible for MBT. Burden of disease consisted of QoL, measured with the EuroQol EQ-5D-3L, and costs, calculated using the Trimbos and Institute for Medical Technology Assessment Questionnaire for Costs Associated with Psychiatric Illness. RESULTS: The mean QoL index score was .48. The mean total costs in the year prior to treatment were €16,879 per patient, of which 21 % consisted of productivity costs. CONCLUSIONS: The burden of disease in BPD patients eligible for MBT is high, which makes it more likely that society is willing to invest in treatment for these patients. However, this finding should not be interpreted as a license to unlimitedly use resources to reimburse treatment for severe BPD patients, as these findings do not provide any information on the effectiveness of MBT or other available treatment programs for BPD. The effectiveness of available treatments should be evident by studies on the effectiveness of the treatment itself and by comparing the effectiveness of these treatments to treatment as usual and to other treatment options for BPD patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The data on this paper came from two trials: NTR2175 and NTR2292 .

Value of Information Analysis Applied to the Economic Evaluation of Interventions Aimed at Reducing Juvenile Delinquency: An Illustration.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether a value of information analysis, commonly applied in health care evaluations, is feasible and meaningful in the field of crime prevention. METHODS: Interventions aimed at reducing juvenile delinquency are increasingly being evaluated according to their cost-effectiveness. Results of cost-effectiveness models are subject to uncertainty in their cost and effect estimates. Further research can reduce that parameter uncertainty. The value of such further research can be estimated using a value of information analysis, as illustrated in the current study. We built upon an earlier published cost-effectiveness model that demonstrated the comparison of two interventions aimed at reducing juvenile delinquency. Outcomes were presented as costs per criminal activity free year. RESULTS: At a societal willingness-to-pay of €71,700 per criminal activity free year, further research to eliminate parameter uncertainty was valued at €176 million. Therefore, in this illustrative analysis, the value of information analysis determined that society should be willing to spend a maximum of €176 million in reducing decision uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness of the two interventions. Moreover, the results suggest that reducing uncertainty in some specific model parameters might be more valuable than in others. CONCLUSIONS: Using a value of information framework to assess the value of conducting further research in the field of crime prevention proved to be feasible. The results were meaningful and can be interpreted according to health care evaluation studies. This analysis can be helpful in justifying additional research funds to further inform the reimbursement decision in regard to interventions for juvenile delinquents.

Estimating subgroup effects using the propensity score method: a practical application in outcomes research.

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to demonstrate the feasibility of the univariate and generalized propensity score (PS) method in subgroup analysis of outcomes research. METHODS: First, to estimate subgroup effects, we tested the performance of 2 different PS methods, using Monte Carlo simulations: (1) the univariate PS with additional adjustment on the subgroup; and (2) the generalized PS, estimated by crossing the treatment options with a subgroup variable. The subgroup effects were estimated in a linear regression model using the 2 PS adjustments. We further explored whether the subgroup variable should be included in the univariate PS. Second, the 2 methods were compared using data from a large effectiveness study on psychotherapy in personality disorders. Using these data we tested the differences between short-term and long-term treatment, with the severity of patients' problems defining the subgroups of interest. RESULTS: The Monte Carlo simulations showed minor differences between both PS methods, with the bias and mean squared error overall marginally lower for the generalized PS. When considering the univariate PS, the subgroup variable can be excluded from the PS estimation and only adjusted for in the outcome equation. When applied to the psychotherapy data, the univariate and generalized PS estimations gave similar results. CONCLUSION: The results support the use of the generalized PS as a feasible method, compared with the univariate PS, to find certain subgroup effects in nonrandomized outcomes research.

Day hospital Mentalization-based treatment versus intensive outpatient Mentalization-based treatment for patients with severe borderline personality disorder: protocol of a multicentre randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is associated with a high socioeconomic burden. Although a number of evidence-based treatments for BPD are currently available, they are not widely disseminated; furthermore, there is a need for more research concerning their efficacy and cost-effectiveness. Such knowledge promises to lead to more efficient use of resources, which will facilitate the effective dissemination of these costly treatments. This study focuses on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of Mentalization-Based Treatment (MBT), a manualized treatment for patients with BPD. Studies to date have either investigated MBT in a day hospitalization setting (MBT-DH) or MBT offered in an intensive outpatient setting (MBT-IOP). No trial has compared the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of these MBT programmes. As both interventions differ considerably in terms of intensity of treatment, and thus potentially in terms of efficacy and cost-effectiveness, there is a need for comparative trials. This study therefore sets out to investigate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of MBT-DH versus MBT-IOP in patients with BPD. A secondary aim is to investigate the association between baseline measures and outcome, which might improve treatment selection and thus optimize efficacy and cost-effectiveness. METHODS/DESIGN: A multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing MBT-DH versus MBT-IOP in severe BPD patients. Patients are screened for BPD using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders, and are assessed before randomization, at the start of treatment and 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 and 36 months after the start of treatment. Patients who refuse to participate will be offered care as usual in the same treatment centre. The primary outcome measure is symptom severity as measured by the Brief Symptom Inventory. Secondary outcome measures include parasuicidal behaviour, depression, substance use, social, interpersonal, and personality functioning, attachment, mentalizing capacities, and quality of life. All analyses will be conducted based on the intention-to-treat principle. Cost-effectiveness will be calculated based on costs per quality-adjusted life-year. DISCUSSION: This multisite randomized trial will provide data to refine criteria for treatment selection for severe BPD patients and promises to optimize (cost-)effectiveness of the treatment of BPD patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR2292 . Registered 16 April 2010.

Day Hospital Mentalization-Based Treatment (MBT-DH) versus treatment as usual in the treatment of severe borderline personality disorder: protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Severe borderline personality disorder is associated with a very high psychosocial and economic burden. Current treatment guidelines suggest that several manualized treatments, including day hospital Mentalization-Based Treatment (MBT-DH), are effective in these patients. However, only two randomized controlled trials have compared manualized MBT-DH with treatment as usual. Given the relative paucity of data supporting the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of MBT-DH, the possible influence of researcher allegiance in one of the trials, and potential problems with the generalization of findings to mental health systems in other countries, this multi-site randomized trial aims to investigate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of manualized MBT-DH compared to manualized specialist treatment as usual in The Netherlands. METHODS/DESIGN: The trial is being conducted at two sites in The Netherlands. Patients with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of borderline personality disorder and a score of ≥ 20 on the Borderline Personality Disorder Severity Index were randomly allocated to MBT-DH or treatment as usual. The MBT-DH program consists of a maximum of 18 months' intensive treatment, followed by a maximum of 18 months of maintenance therapy. Specialist treatment as usual is provided by the City Crisis Service in Amsterdam, a service that specializes in treating patients with personality disorders, offering manualized, non-MBT interventions including family interventions, Linehan training, social skills training, and pharmacotherapy, without a maximum time limit. Patients are assessed at baseline and subsequently every 6 months up to 36 months after the start of treatment. The primary outcome measure is the frequency and severity of manifestations of borderline personality disorder as assessed by the Borderline Personality Disorder Severity Index. Secondary outcome measures include parasuicidal behaviour, symptomatic distress, social and interpersonal functioning, personality functioning, attachment, capacity for mentalizing and quality of life. Cost-effectiveness is assessed in terms of the cost per quality-adjusted life year. Outcomes will be analyzed using multilevel analyses based on intention-to-treat principles. DISCUSSION: Severe borderline personality disorder is a serious psychological disorder that is associated with high burden. This multi-site randomized trial will provide further data concerning the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of MBT-DH for these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR2175.