Economic Analysis of Brief Motivational Intervention Following Trauma Related to Drugs and Alcohol.

BACKGROUND: Very few studies have conducted an economic assessment of brief motivational intervention (BMI) in patients experiencing traumatic injuries related to alcohol and/or substance use. Furthermore, findings concerning the potential long-term economic benefits of BMI applied in nursing are promising but very scarce. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the costs and benefits associated with the application of a BMI program by nursing staff to patients hospitalized for trauma related to substance use. METHODS: An analysis of costs and benefits was conducted in a nonrandomized study of a retrospective cohort of patients. An intervention and follow-up (of 10-52 months) of patients between 16 and 70 years of age admitted for traumatic injuries in University Hospital of Granada were carried out with a cohort of 294 patients (intervention = 162 vs. no intervention = 132) between 2011 and 2016. The National Health Service's perspective on the use of medical resources and the costs associated with intervention and recidivism was considered. A cost analysis with a 5-year time frame and a subsequent analysis of sensitivity were conducted. RESULTS: Direct medical costs associated with trauma recidivism were significantly lower in patients who received BMI, as compared to patients who did not receive it, &OV0556;751.82 per patient (95% CI &OV0556;13.15 to &OV0556;1,490.48) in the first year. The cost-benefit ratio of &OV0556;74.92 at 4 years reflects National Health Service savings for each euro invested in BMI. DISCUSSION: The implementation of BMI programs in nursing care may be profitable from an economic standpoint, justifying the inclusion of these programs in hospitals both because of their efficacy and the potential savings incurred by the health system. This study addresses the lack of evidence regarding the economic implications linked to the effectiveness of the intervention to reduce substance use and trauma recidivism. Results identify BMI delivered in hospitals by nurses as a technique that offers the potential for reducing costs linked to trauma recidivism. The research has important practical implications for hospital nurses and doctors.

Motivational Interviewing to Encourage Quit Attempts Among Smokers Not Ready to Quit: A Trial-Based Economic Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This study used data from a randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of motivational interviewing (MI) relative to health education (HE) and brief advice (BA) to encourage quit attempts and cessation in order to determine their relative cost-effectiveness. AIMS AND METHODS: Urban community residents (n = 255) with low desire to quit smoking were randomized to MI, HE, or BA which differed in communication style and/or number of treatment sessions. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were used to compare the intensive interventions (MI and HE) to BA for facilitating quit attempts and smoking cessation. Costs were calculated from the perspective of an agency that might engage in program delivery. Sensitivity analysis examined different assumptions for MI training and pharmacotherapy costs. RESULTS: Total intervention delivery time costs per participant for MI, HE, and BA were $46.63, $42.87, and $2.4, respectively. Cost-effectiveness ratios per quit attempt at 24 weeks were $380 for MI, $272 for HE, and $209 for BA. The cost per additional quit attempt for MI and HE relative to BA was $508 and $301, respectively. The cost per additional quit for MI and HE relative to BA was $2030 and $752, respectively. Four separate sensitivity analyses conducted in our study did not change the conclusion the HE had a lower Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio for both quit attempts and cessation. CONCLUSIONS: HE was the most cost-effective of the three types of smoking cessation induction therapies and therefore may be preferable for smokers who are less motivated to quit. Providing valuable cost information in choosing different clinical methods for motivating smokers to quit. IMPLICATIONS: All direct costs and activity-based time costs associated with delivering the intervention were analyzed from the perspective of an agency that may wish to replicate these strategies. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of MI relative to HE and BA to encourage quit attempts and cessation determined their relative cost-effectiveness. HE was the most cost-effective of the three types of smoking cessation induction therapies and therefore may be preferable. Despite guideline recommendations, MI may not be the best approach to encourage quit attempts in diverse populations. Rather, a structured, intensive HE intervention might be the most cost-effective alternative.

Protocol of a two arm randomised, multi-centre, 12-month controlled trial: evaluating the impact of a Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT)-based intervention Supporting UPtake and Adherence to antiretrovirals (SUPA) in adults with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Delay to start antiretroviral therapy (ART) and nonadherence compromise the health and wellbeing of people living with HIV (PLWH), raise the cost of care and increase risk of transmission to sexual partners. To date, interventions to improve adherence to ART have had limited success, perhaps because they have failed to systematically elicit and address both perceptual and practical barriers to adherence. The primary aim of this study is to determine the efficacy of the Supporting UPtake and Adherence (SUPA) intervention. METHODS: This study comprises 2 phases. Phase 1 is an observational cohort study, in which PLWH who are ART naïve and recommended to take ART by their clinician complete a questionnaire assessing their beliefs about ART over 12 months. Phase 2 is a randomised controlled trial (RCT) nested within the observational cohort study to investigate the effectiveness of the SUPA intervention on adherence to ART. PLWH at risk of nonadherence (based on their beliefs about ART) will be recruited and randomised 1:1 to the intervention (SUPA intervention + usual care) and control (usual care) arms. The SUPA intervention involves 4 tailored treatment support sessions delivered by a Research Nurse utilising a collaborative Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) and Motivational Interviewing (MI) approach. Sessions are tailored to individual needs and preferences based on the individual patient's perceptions and practical barriers to ART. An animation series and intervention manual have been developed to communicate a rationale for the personal necessity for ART and illustrate concerns and potential solutions. The primary outcome is adherence to ART measured using Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS). Three hundred seventy-two patients will be sufficient to detect a 15% difference in adherence with 80% power and an alpha of 0.05. Costs will be compared between intervention and control groups. Costs will be combined with the primary outcome in cost-effectiveness analyses. Quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) will also be estimated over the follow-up period and used in the analyses. DISCUSSION: The findings will enable patients, healthcare providers and policy makers to make informed decisions about the value of the SUPA intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was retrospectively registered 21/02/2014, ISRCTN35514212 .

Cost-effectiveness of electronic- and clinician-delivered screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment for women in reproductive health centers.

AIMS: To determine the cost-effectiveness of electronic- and clinician-delivered SBIRT (Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment) for reducing primary substance use among women treated in reproductive health centers. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis based on a randomized controlled trial. SETTING: New Haven, CT, USA. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of 439 women seeking routine care in reproductive health centers who used cigarettes, risky amounts of alcohol, illicit drugs or misused prescription medication. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to enhanced usual care (EUC, n = 151), electronic-delivered SBIRT (e-SBIRT, n = 143) or clinician-delivered SBIRT (SBIRT, n = 145). MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was days of primary substance abstinence during the 6-month follow-up period. To account for the possibility that patients might substitute a different drug for their primary substance during the 6-month follow-up period, we also considered the number of days of abstinence from all substances. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves determined the relative cost-effectiveness of the three conditions from both the clinic and patient perspectives. FINDINGS: From a health-care provider perspective, e-SBIRT is likely (with probability greater than 0.5) to be cost-effective for any willingness-to-pay value for an additional day of primary-substance abstinence and an additional day of all-substance abstinence. From a patient perspective, EUC is most likely to be the cost-effective intervention when the willingness to pay for an additional day of abstinence (both primary-substance and all-substance) is less than $0.18 and e-SBIRT is most likely to be the cost-effective intervention when the willingness to pay for an additional day of abstinence (both primary-substance and all-substance) is greater than $0.18. CONCLUSIONS: e-SBIRT could be a cost-effective approach, from both health-care provider and patient perspectives, for use in reproductive health centers to help women reduce substance misuse.

Wireless Participant Incentives Using Reloadable Bank Cards to Increase Clinical Trial Retention With Abused Women Drinkers: A Natural Experiment.

Retaining participants in longitudinal studies is a unique methodological challenge in many areas of investigation, and specifically for researchers aiming to identify effective interventions for women experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV). Individuals in abusive relationships are often transient and have logistical, confidentiality, and safety concerns that limit future contact. A natural experiment occurred during a large randomized clinical trial enrolling women in abusive relationships who were also heavy drinkers, which allowed for the comparison of two incentive methods to promote longitudinal retention: cash payment versus reloadable wireless bank cards. In all, 600 patients were enrolled in the overall trial, which aimed to incentivize participants using a reloadable bank card system to promote the completion of 11 weekly interactive voice response system (IVRS) phone surveys and 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up phone or in person interviews. The first 145 participants were paid with cash as a result of logistical delays in setting up the bank card system. At 12 weeks, participants receiving the bank card incentive completed significantly more IVRS phone surveys, odds ratio (OR) = 2.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) = [0.01, 1.69]. There were no significant differences between the two groups related to satisfaction or safety and/or privacy. The bank card system delivered lower administrative burden for tracking payments for study staff. Based on these and other results, our large medical research university is implementing reloadable bank card as the preferred method of participant incentive payments.

Cost and cost-effectiveness of computerized vs. in-person motivational interventions in the criminal justice system.

INTRODUCTION: Although substance use is common among probationers in the United States, treatment initiation remains an ongoing problem. Among the explanations for low treatment initiation are that probationers are insufficiently motivated to seek treatment, and that probation staff have insufficient training and resources to use evidence-based strategies such as motivational interviewing. A web-based intervention based on motivational enhancement principles may address some of the challenges of initiating treatment but has not been tested to date in probation settings. The current study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a computerized intervention, Motivational Assessment Program to Initiate Treatment (MAPIT), relative to face-to-face Motivational Interviewing (MI) and supervision as usual (SAU), delivered at the outset of probation. METHODS: The intervention took place in probation departments in two U.S. cities. The baseline sample comprised 316 participants (MAPIT = 104, MI = 103, and SAU = 109), 90% (n = 285) of whom completed the 6-month follow-up. Costs were estimated from study records and time logs kept by interventionists. The effectiveness outcome was self-reported initiation into any treatment (formal or informal) within 2 and 6 months of the baseline interview. The cost-effectiveness analysis involved assessing dominance and computing incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Implementation costs were used in the base case of the cost-effectiveness analysis, which excludes both a hypothetical license fee to recoup development costs and startup costs. An intent-to-treat approach was taken. RESULTS: MAPIT cost $79.37 per participant, which was ~$55 lower than the MI cost of $134.27 per participant. Appointment reminders comprised a large proportion of the cost of the MAPIT and MI intervention arms. In the base case, relative to SAU, MAPIT cost $6.70 per percentage point increase in the probability of initiating treatment. If a decision-maker is willing to pay $15 or more to improve the probability of initiating treatment by 1%, estimates suggest she can be 70% confident that MAPIT is good value relative to SAU at the 2-month follow-up and 90% confident that MAPIT is good value at the 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Web-based MAPIT may be good value compared to in-person delivered alternatives. This conclusion is qualified because the results are not robust to narrowing the outcome to initiating formal treatment only. Further work should explore ways to improve access to efficacious treatment in probation settings.

Twelve-Month Outcomes of a Group-Randomized Community Health Advocate-Led Smoking Cessation Intervention in Public Housing.

Background: Lower rates of smoking cessation are a major reason for the higher prevalence of smoking among socioeconomically disadvantaged adults. Because barriers to quitting are both more numerous and severe, socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers may benefit from more intensive intervention. We sought to determine whether a smoking cessation intervention delivered by public housing residents trained as Tobacco Treatment Advocates (TTAs) could increase utilization of cessation resources and increase abstinence. Methods: We conducted a group-randomized trial among Boston public housing residents who were interested in quitting smoking. Participants at control sites received standard cessation materials and a one-time visit from a TTA who provided basic counseling and information about cessation resources. Participants at intervention sites were eligible for multiple visits by a TTA who employed motivational interviewing, cessation counseling, and navigation to encourage smokers to utilize cessation treatment (Smokers' Quitline and clinic-based programs). Utilization and 7-day and 30-day point prevalence abstinence were assessed at 12 months. Self-reported abstinence was biochemically verified. Results: Intervention participants (n = 121) were more likely than control participants (n = 129) to both utilize treatment programs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.15; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93-4.91) and 7-day and 30-day point prevalence abstinence (aOR: 2.60 (1.72-3.94); 2.98 (1.56-5.68), respectively). Mediation analysis indicated that the higher level of utilization did not explain the intervention effect. Conclusions: An intervention delivered by peer health advocates was able to increase utilization of treatment programs and smoking abstinence among public housing residents. Future studies of similar types of interventions should identify the key mechanisms responsible for success. Implications: In order to narrow the large and growing socioeconomic disparity in smoking rates, more effective cessation interventions are needed for low-income smokers. Individual culturally-relevant coaching provided in smokers' residences may help overcome the heightened barriers to cessation experienced by this group of smokers. In this study among smokers residing in public housing, an intervention delivered by peer health advocates trained in motivational interviewing, basic smoking cessation skills, and client navigation significantly increased abstinence at 12 months. Future research should address whether these findings are replicable in other settings both within and outside of public housing.

Does intensive management improve remission rates in patients with intermediate rheumatoid arthritis? (the TITRATE trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled active rheumatoid arthritis can lead to increasing disability and reduced quality of life over time. 'Treating to target' has been shown to be effective in active established disease and also in early disease. However, there is a lack of nationally agreed treatment protocols for patients with established rheumatoid arthritis who have intermediate disease activity. This trial is designed to investigate whether intensive management of disease leads to a greater number of remissions at 12 months. Levels of disability and quality of life, and acceptability and cost-effectiveness of the intervention will also be examined. METHODS: The trial is a 12-month, pragmatic, randomised, open-label, two-arm, parallel-group, multicentre trial undertaken at specialist rheumatology centres across England. Three hundred and ninety-eight patients with established rheumatoid arthritis will be recruited. They will currently have intermediate disease activity (disease activity score for 28 joints assessed using an erythrocyte sedimentation rate of 3.2 to 5.1 with at least three active joints) and will be taking at least one disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug. Participants will be randomly selected to receive intensive management or standard care. Intensive management will involve monthly clinical reviews with a specialist health practitioner, where drug treatment will be optimised and an individualised treatment support programme delivered based on several principles of motivational interviewing to address identified problem areas, such as pain, fatigue and adherence. Standard care will follow standard local pathways and will be in line with current English guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Patients will be assessed initially and at 6 and 12 months through self-completed questionnaires and clinical evaluation. DISCUSSION: The trial will establish whether the known benefits of intensive treatment strategies in active rheumatoid arthritis are also seen in patients with established rheumatoid arthritis who have moderately active disease. It will evaluate both the clinical and cost-effectiveness of intensive treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials, ID: ISRCTN70160382 . Registered on 16 January 2014.

Economic evaluation of a behavioral intervention versus brief advice for substance use treatment in pregnant women: results from a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Substance use in pregnancy is associated with severe maternal and fetal morbidities and substantial economic costs. However, few studies have evaluated the cost-effectiveness of substance use treatment programs in pregnant women. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the economic impact of a behavioral intervention that integrated motivational enhancement therapy with cognitive behavioral therapy (MET-CBT) for treatment of substance use in pregnancy, in comparison with brief advice. METHODS: We conducted an economic evaluation alongside a clinical trial by collecting data on resource utilization and performing a cost minimization analysis as MET-CBT and brief advice had similar effects on clinical outcomes (e.g., alcohol and drug use and birth outcomes). Costs were estimated from the health care system's perspective and included intervention costs, hospital facility costs, physician fees, and costs of psychotropic medications from the date of intake assessment until 3-month postpartum. We compared effects of MET-CBT on costs with those of brief advice using Wilcoxon rank sum tests. RESULTS: Although the integrated MET-CBT therapy had higher intervention cost than brief advice (median = $1297/participant versus $303/participant, p < 0.01), costs of care during the prenatal period, delivery, and postpartum period, as well as for psychotropic medications, were comparable between the two groups (all p values ≥ 0.55). There was no statistically significant difference in overall cost of care (median total cost = $26,993/participant for MET-CBT versus $27,831/participant for brief advice, p = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: The MET-CBT therapy and brief advice resulted in similar clinical outcomes and overall medical costs. Further research incorporating non-medical costs, targeting women with more severe substance use disorders, and evaluating the impact of MET-CBT on participants' quality of life will provide additional insights. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00227903 . Registered 27 September 2005.

The influence of state-level policy environments on the activation of the Medicaid SBIRT reimbursement codes.

AIMS: To examine how institutional constraints, comprising federal actions and states' substance abuse policy environments, influence states' decisions to activate Medicaid reimbursement codes for screening and brief intervention for risky substance use in the United States. METHODS: A discrete-time duration model was used to estimate the effect of institutional constraints on the likelihood of activating the Medicaid reimbursement codes. Primary constraints included federal Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) grant funding, substance abuse priority, economic climate, political climate and interstate diffusion. Study data came from publicly available secondary data sources. RESULTS: Federal SBIRT grant funding did not affect significantly the likelihood of activation (P = 0.628). A $1 increase in per-capita block grant funding was associated with a 10-percentage point reduction in the likelihood of activation (P = 0.003) and a $1 increase in per-capita state substance use disorder expenditures was associated with a 2-percentage point increase in the likelihood of activation (P = 0.004). States with enacted parity laws (P = 0.016) and a Democratic-controlled state government were also more likely to activate the codes. CONCLUSION: In the United States, the determinants of state activation of Medicaid Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) reimbursement codes are complex, and include more than financial considerations. Federal block grant funding is a strong disincentive to activating the SBIRT reimbursement codes, while more direct federal SBIRT grant funding has no detectable effects.

Sustaining SBIRT in the wild: simulating revenues and costs for Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment programs.

AIMS: To examine the conditions under which Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) programs can be sustained by health insurance payments. DESIGN: A mathematical model was used to estimate the number of patients needed for revenues to exceed costs. SETTING: Three medical settings in the United States were examined: in-patient, out-patient and emergency department. Components of SBIRT were delivered by combinations of health-care practitioners (generalists) and behavioral health specialists. PARTICIPANTS: Practitioners in seven SBIRT programs who received grants from the US Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). MEASUREMENTS: Program costs and revenues were measured using data from grantees. Patient flows were measured from administrative data and adjusted with prevalence and screening estimates from the literature. FINDINGS: SBIRT can be sustained through health insurance reimbursement in out-patient and emergency department settings in most staffing mixes. To sustain SBIRT in in-patient programs, a patient flow larger than the national average may be needed; if that flow is achieved, the range of screens required to maintain a surplus is narrow. Sensitivity analyses suggest that the results are very sensitive to changes in the proportion of insured patients. CONCLUSIONS: Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment programs in the United States can be sustained by health insurance payments under a variety of staffing models. Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment programs can be sustained only in an in-patient setting with above-average patient flow (more than 2500 screens). Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment programs in out-patient and emergency department settings can be sustained with below-average patient flows (fewer than 125 000 out-patient visits and fewer than 27 000 emergency department visits).

The cost-effectiveness of brief intervention versus brief treatment of Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) in the United States.

AIMS: To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) comparing the delivery of brief intervention (BI) with brief treatment (BT) within Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) programs. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental differences in observed baseline characteristics between BI and BT patients were adjusted using propensity score techniques. Incremental comparison of costs and health outcomes associated with BI and BT. SETTING: Health-care settings in four US states participating in Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration SBIRT grant programs. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety patients who received BT and 878 who received BI. MEASUREMENTS: Per-patient cost of SBIRT, patient demographics and six measures of substance use: proportion using alcohol, proportion using alcohol to intoxication, days of alcohol use, days of alcohol use to intoxication, proportion using drugs and days using drugs. FINDINGS: BI and BT were associated with better outcomes. The cost of SBIRT was significantly higher for BT patients ($75.54 versus 16.32, 95% confidence interval, P < 0.01). BT would be cost-effective if the decision-maker had a willingness to pay of $8.90 for a 1 percentage point reduction in the probability of using any alcohol. For the other five outcomes, BT was less effective and more costly, and BI would be a better use of resources. CONCLUSIONS: It might be cost-effective to offer brief treatment if the goal is to abstain from alcohol. However, the higher effectiveness of brief treatment for this outcome is associated with considerable uncertainty and, because both brief intervention and brief treatment improve all outcomes, brief treatment does not appear to be a good use of resources.

The Effectiveness and Cost of Clinical Supervision for Motivational Interviewing: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

The effectiveness of a competency-based supervision approach called Motivational Interviewing Assessment: Supervisory Tools for Enhancing Proficiency (MIA: STEP) was compared to supervision-as-usual (SAU) for increasing clinicians' motivational interviewing (MI) adherence and competence and client retention and primary substance abstinence in a multisite hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation randomized controlled trial. Participants were 66 clinicians and 450 clients within one of eleven outpatient substance abuse programs. An independent evaluation of audio recorded supervision sessions indicated that MIA: STEP and SAU were highly and comparably discriminable across sites. While clinicians in both supervision conditions improved their MI performance, clinician supervised with MIA: STEP, compared to those in SAU, showed significantly greater increases in the competency in which they used fundamental and advanced MI strategies when using MI across seven intakes through a 16-week follow-up. There were no retention or substance use differences among the clients seen by clinicians in MIA: STEP or SAU. MIA: STEP was substantially more expensive to deliver than SAU. Innovative alternatives to resource-intensive competency-based supervision approaches such as MIA: STEP are needed to promote the implementation of evidence-based practices.

Cost Analysis of Motivational Interviewing and Preschool Education for Secondhand Smoke Exposures.

INTRODUCTION: This study determines if expenditures associated with implementing a combined motivational interviewing (MI) and Head Start-level education program (MI+Education), as compared to education alone, yield cost savings to society. METHODS: Post hoc cost analyses were applied to a randomized controlled-trial of MI among predominantly African American, low-income caregivers of 330 Baltimore City Head Start students who reside with a smoker. The primary outcome was the cost savings of MI+Education from averted direct secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe)-related acute healthcare events and inferred indirect costs (work days lost, transportation and reduction in cigarettes smoked). The net direction of savings was defined by the sum of averted direct and indirect costs of the MI+Education intervention at 3, 6 and 12 months, benchmarked against the Education alone cohort at the equivalent time periods. RESULTS: The costs saved by the MI+Education intervention, relative to Education alone, resulted in savings at solely the 12-month follow-up time point. Significant savings were appreciated from averted emergency department (ED) visits at 12 months ($4410; 95% simulation interval [SI]: $2241, $6626) for the MI+Education group. The total savings at 12 months ($2274; 95% SI: -3916, $8442) could not overcome additional program costs of implementing MI to Head Start-level education ($13 695; 95% SI: $11 250, $16 034). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to examine the cost of either intervention on SHSe-attributed pediatric healthcare costs from a population level relevant for federal and community decision makers. Intervention costs could not be offset by short-term savings but a trend towards positive savings was appreciated 1 year after implementation. IMPLICATIONS: Behavioral interventions are effective in reducing SHSe in children. However, many of these interventions are not implemented in community settings due to lack of resources and money. Behavioral strategies may be a cost-saving addition to the national initiatives to create smoke-free home environments. The long-term benefits of MI, as evidenced from cost savings from averted ED visits, appeared to show MI+Education to be a robust long-term strategy. The decrease of acute healthcare services at 12 months may be informative for policy decision makers seeking to allocate limited resources to reduce the usage of costly ED services and hospital readmissions.

Cost-effectiveness of motivational intervention with significant others for patients with alcohol misuse.

AIMS: To estimate the incremental cost, cost-effectiveness and benefit-cost ratio of incorporating a significant other (SO) into motivational intervention for alcohol misuse. DESIGN: We obtained economic data from the one year with the intervention in full operation for patients in a recent randomized trial. SETTING: The underlying trial took place at a major urban hospital in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: The trial randomized 406 (68.7% male) eligible hazardous drinkers (196 during the economic study) admitted to the emergency department or trauma unit. INTERVENTION: The motivational interview condition consisted of one in-person session featuring personalized normative feedback. The significant other motivational interview condition comprised one joint session with the participant and SO in which the SO's perspective and support were elicited. MEASUREMENTS: We ascertained activities across 445 representative time segments through work sampling (including staff idle time), calculated the incremental cost in per patient of incorporating an SO, expressed the results in 2014 US$, incorporated quality and mortality effects from a closely related trial and derived the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. FINDINGS: From a health system perspective, the incremental cost per patient of adding an SO was $341.09 [95% confidence interval (CI) = $244.44-437.74]. The incremental cost per year per hazardous drinker averted was $3623 (CI = $1777-22,709), the cost per QALY gained $32,200 (CI = $15,800-201,700), and the benefit-cost ratio was 4.73 (95% CI = 0.7-9.66). If adding an SO into the intervention strategy were concentrated during the hours with highest risk or in a trauma unit, it would become even more cost-beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: Using criteria established by the World Health Organization (cost-effectiveness below the country's gross domestic product per capita), incorporating a significant other into a patient's motivational intervention for alcohol misuse is highly cost-effective.

Cost-utility Analysis of Supported Self-management with Motiva-tional Interviewing for Patients with Psoriasis.

There are few studies evaluating the cost-effectiveness of self-management interventions for patients with psoriasis. Motivational interviewing (MI) as a telephone follow-up after climate-heliotherapy was effective on several clinical parameters, but its cost-effectiveness is unknown. A cost-utility analysis was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing MI with usual care. A total of 169 Norwegian patients were included. A within-trial analysis compared the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Utilities were measured with the 15D instrument, supplemented with Dermatological Life Quality Index (DLQI). A time-integrated summary score defined the clinical effects. QALYs were adjusted for baseline differences. MI provided equivalent quality of life and utility (15D: -0.0022 QALYs (95% Cl -0.02, 0.01), p = 0.77, and DLQI: -0.62 QALYs (95%CI -0.65, 0.41), p = 0.24, at lower costs €-1103 (-2293, 87), p = 0.058, compared with treatment-as-usual. The MI intervention was thus cost-effective. This result was more evident when using the DLQI as outcome measure compared with 15D.

A feasibility randomised controlled trial of a motivational interviewing-based intervention for weight loss maintenance in adults.

BACKGROUND: Obesity has significant health and NHS cost implications. Relatively small reductions in weight have clinically important benefits, but long-term weight loss maintenance (WLM) is challenging. Behaviour change interventions have been identified as key for WLM. Motivation is crucial to supporting behaviour change, and motivational interviewing (MI) has been identified as a successful approach to changing health behaviours. The study was designed as an adequately powered, pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT); however, owing to recruitment issues, the study became a feasibility trial. OBJECTIVES: To assess recruitment, retention, feasibility, acceptability, compliance and delivery of a 12-month intervention to support WLM. Secondary objectives were to assess the impact of the intervention on body mass index (BMI) and other secondary outcomes. DESIGN: Three-arm individually randomised controlled trial comprising an intensive arm, a less intensive arm and a control arm. SETTING: Community setting in South Wales and the East Midlands. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 18-70 years with a current or previous BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m(2) who could provide evidence of at least 5% weight loss during the previous 12 months. INTERVENTION: Participants received individually tailored MI, which included planning and self-monitoring. The intensive arm received six face-to-face sessions followed by nine telephone sessions. The less intensive arm received two face-to-face sessions followed by two telephone sessions. The control arm received a leaflet advising them on healthy lifestyle. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility outcomes included numbers recruited, retention and adherence. The primary effectiveness outcome was BMI at 12 months post randomisation. Secondary outcomes included waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio, physical activity, proportion maintaining weight loss, diet, quality of life, health service resource usage, binge eating and well-being. A process evaluation assessed intervention delivery, adherence, and participants' and practitioners' views. Economic analysis aimed to assess cost-effectiveness in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS: A total of 170 participants were randomised. Retention was good (84%) and adherence was excellent (intensive, 83%; less intensive, 91%). The between-group difference in mean BMI indicated the intensive arm had BMIs 1.0 kg/m(2) lower than the controls [95% confidence interval (CI) -2.2 kg/m(2) to 0.2 kg/m(2)]. Similarly, a potential difference was found in weight (average difference of 2.8 kg, 95% CI -6.1 kg to 0.5 kg). The intensive arm had odds of maintaining on average 43% [odds ratio(OR) 1.4, 95% CI 0.6 to 3.5] higher than controls. None of these findings were statistically significant. Further analyses controlling for level of adherence indicated that average BMI was 1.2 kg/m(2) lower in the intensive arm than the control arm (95% CI -2.5 kg/m(2) to 0.0 kg/m(2)). The intensive intervention led to a statistically significant difference in weight (mean -3.7 kg, 95% CI -7.1 kg to -0.3 kg). The other secondary outcomes showed limited evidence of differences between groups. The intervention was delivered as planned, and both practitioners and participants were positive about the intervention and its impact. Although not powered to assess cost-effectiveness, results of this feasibility study suggest that neither intervention as currently delivered is likely to be cost-effective in routine practice. CONCLUSION: This is the first trial of an intervention for WLM in the UK, the intervention is feasible and acceptable, and retention and adherence were high. The main effectiveness outcome showed a promising mean difference in the intensive arm. Owing to the small sample size, we are limited in the conclusions we can draw. However, findings suggest that the intensive intervention may facilitate long-term weight maintenance and, therefore, further testing in an effectiveness trial may be indicated. Research examining WLM is in its infancy, further research is needed to develop our understanding of WLM and to expand theory to inform the development of interventions to be tested in rigorously designed RCTs with cost-effectiveness assessed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN35774128. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 50. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Motivational tools to improve probationer treatment outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Motivational interviewing (MI) is a promising practice to increase motivation, treatment retention, and reducing recidivism among offender populations. Computer-delivered interventions have grown in popularity as a way to change behaviors associated with drug and alcohol use. METHODS/DESIGN: Motivational Assistance Program to Initiate Treatment (MAPIT) is a three arm, multisite, randomized controlled trial, which examines the impact of Motivational interviewing (MI), a motivational computer program (MC), and supervision as usual (SAU) on addiction treatment initiation, engagement, and retention. Secondary outcomes include drug/alcohol use, probation progress, recidivism (i.e., criminal behavior) and HIV/AIDS testing and treatment among probationers. Participant characteristics are measured at baseline, 2, and 6 months after assignment. The entire study will include 600 offenders, with each site recruiting 300 offenders (Baltimore City, Maryland and Dallas, Texas). All participants will go through standard intake procedures for probation and participate in probation requirements as usual. After standard intake, participants will be recruited and screened for eligibility. DISCUSSION: The results of this clinical trial will fill a gap in knowledge about ways to motivate probationers to participate in addiction treatment and HIV care. This randomized clinical trial is innovative in the way it examines the use of in-person vs. technological approaches to improve probationer success. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01891656.

The Quik Fix study: a randomised controlled trial of brief interventions for young people with alcohol-related injuries and illnesses accessing emergency department and crisis support care.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol is a major preventable cause of injury, disability and death in young people. Large numbers of young people with alcohol-related injuries and medical conditions present to hospital emergency departments (EDs). Access to brief, efficacious, accessible and cost effective treatment is an international health priority within this age group. While there is growing evidence for the efficacy of brief motivational interviewing (MI) for reducing alcohol use in young people, there is significant scope to increase its impact, and determine if it is the most efficacious and cost effective type of brief intervention available. The efficacy of personality-targeted interventions (PIs) for alcohol misuse delivered individually to young people is yet to be determined or compared to MI, despite growing evidence for school-based PIs. This study protocol describes a randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of telephone-delivered MI, PI and an Assessment Feedback/Information (AF/I) only control for reducing alcohol use and related harm in young people. METHODS/DESIGN: Participants will be 390 young people aged 16 to 25 years presenting to a crisis support service or ED with alcohol-related injuries and illnesses (including severe alcohol intoxication). This single blinded superiority trial randomized young people to (i) 2 sessions of MI; (ii) 2 sessions of a new PI or (iii) a 1 session AF/I only control. Participants are reassessed at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months on the primary outcomes of alcohol use and related problems and secondary outcomes of mental health symptoms, functioning, severity of problematic alcohol use, alcohol injuries, alcohol-related knowledge, coping self-efficacy to resist using alcohol, and cost effectiveness. DISCUSSION: This study will identify the most efficacious and cost-effective telephone-delivered brief intervention for reducing alcohol misuse and related problems in young people presenting to crisis support services or EDs. We expect efficacy will be greatest for PI, followed by MI, and then AF/I at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months on the primary and secondary outcome variables. Telephone-delivered brief interventions could provide a youth-friendly, accessible, efficacious, cost-effective and easily disseminated treatment for addressing the significant public health issue of alcohol misuse and related harm in young people. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12613000108718.

Motivational interviewing with American Indian mothers to prevent early childhood caries: study design and methodology of a randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: This randomized control trial assesses the effectiveness of motivational interviewing (MI) to encourage behavior change in new mothers relating to caries prevention when caring for their newborn American Indian (AI) infants and young AI children. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a randomized control trial. We hypothesize that when motivational interviewing is added to enhanced community oral health education services, the new mothers will achieve greater reduction of caries experience in their AI children compared to those who are receiving enhanced community services (ECS) alone. Six hundred mothers or caregivers of AI newborns will be enrolled into the study and randomized to one of the two intervention groups over a two-year period. The children will be followed until the child's third birthday. A cost analysis of the study is being conducted in tandem with the enhanced community services, motivational interviewing behavioral interventions, and the dental screenings for the length of the study. DISCUSSION: The trial is now in the implementation phase and a number of threats to successful completion, such as recruitment and retention challenges in a vast, rural geographic area, have been addressed. The protocol provides a unique model for oral health interventions using principles of community-based participatory research and is currently on schedule to meet study objectives. If the study is successful, motivational interviewing intervention can be applied in AI communities to reduce ECC disparities in this disadvantaged population, with study of further applicability in other populations and settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01116726.