Societal costs of personality disorders among treatment-seeking patients in Norway: the relative contribution of specific DSM-5 categories.

Personality disorders (PDs) are associated with high levels of societal costs, regardless of whether a single PD or a broad range of PDs have been studied. However, research on the relative contribution of specific PD-types on societal costs is limited. The aim of this study was to explore the possible contributions of the individual DSM-5 categories of PDs on the level of societal costs and its components (health service costs and productivity loss), while controlling for the impact of comorbid mental health and substance use disorders on these outcomes. Participants (n = 798) were retrieved from the quality register of the Norwegian Network for Personality Disorders-a collaboration of PD-treatment units within specialist mental health services. The patients were referred to treatment in the time-period 2017-2020. Costs were assessed using a structured interview covering the 6-month period prior to assessment. Diagnoses were determined by semi-structured diagnostic interviews (SCID-5-PD and M.I.N.I.). Statistics included multiple regression analyses. The main result was that no specific PD had a unique contribution to the high level of societal costs generally found among treatment-seeking patients with PDs. Borderline PD (BPD) was the only PD with significantly higher health service costs than the other PDs, while BPD, avoidant PD, and unspecified PD were independently associated with enhanced productivity loss. The differential cost-effects of specific PDs on the cost components were small. Several comorbid mental health and substance use disorders were significant contributors to costs, irrespective of PD status. The results underscore the importance of developing and implementing effective treatments for a broader range of PDs, to reduce the high levels of societal costs associated with all PDs.

Societal costs of personality disorders: A cross-sectional multicenter study of treatment-seeking patients in mental health services in Norway.

OBJECTIVE: There is a relatively small body of research on the cost-of-illness of personality disorders (PDs). Most studies only include borderline PD. The aim of this study was to investigate mean societal costs, including its components, (direct) health service costs and (indirect) productivity loss, among treatment-seeking patients with the broad range of all PDs according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). METHODS: Cross-sectional data from 911 patients diagnosed with at least 1 PD were retrieved from the quality register of the Norwegian Network for Personality Disorders-a collaboration of PD treatment units within specialist mental health services. The patients were referred in the time period 2017-2020. Estimation of costs was based on a bottom-up approach, using information from a structured interview covering the 6-month period before assessment, whereas unit costs were retrieved from public reports, public records, or public agencies. The human capital approach was used to calculate productivity loss. Diagnoses were determined by semi-structured diagnostic interviews (Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5-PD [SCID-5-PD]). RESULTS: The mean societal costs were €20.260 during the 6-month period before specialized treatment. The largest cost component was productivity loss (65%), whereas health service costs constituted 35%. The main contributors to societal costs from the underlying health service cost components were inpatient treatment (20.5%) and individual outpatient treatment (10.5%). CONCLUSION: Societal costs were substantial among treatment-seeking patients with the broad range of DSM-5 PDs, comparable to the societal costs of schizophrenia, and significantly higher than the societal costs of both depression and anxiety disorders. The cost estimates converged with recent, register-based cost-of-illness studies of different PDs but exceeded previous findings from other bottom-up studies. Furthermore, the results underscore the importance of implementing effective and specialized treatment for patients with a broad range of PDs, not only to alleviate individual suffering but also to reduce the level of societal costs. The emphasis on productivity loss as a main contributor to the overall societal costs is substantiated, hence underlining the relevance of interventions focusing on improving occupational functioning.