The cost-utility of an intervention for children and adolescents with a parent having a mental illness in the framework of the German health and social care system: a health economic evaluation of a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Children of families with a parent with a mental illness have an increased risk of developing social and mental health problems resulting in decreased quality of life. Therefore, children and adolescents living in families with a parent with mental illness are regarded as a target group for preventive interventions. To date, only a few economic evaluation studies for interventions directed at preventing the intergenerational transmission of mental health problems exist. In this investigation we estimated the cost utility of an intervention for the support of children and adolescents with a parent having a mental illness from the perspective of the German health and social care system. METHODS: We randomly assigned a total of 214 families with 337 children and adolescents to the intervention (INT) group (108/170) or the control (TAU) group (106/167). Families in the intervention group received on average eight intervention sessions (50-90 min) over 6 months. We estimated total cost of illness by means of the Children and Adolescent Mental Health Service Receipt Inventory (CAMHSRI) over 24 months. For the estimation of Quality-Adjusted Live Years (QALYs) we applied the KIDSCREEN-10. For estimating the incremental cost-utility of the intervention compared to treatment as usual we used the net-benefit approach. RESULTS: We estimated the annual cost of illness amounting to € 3784.59 (SD € 8581.11) in the TAU group and € 3264.44 (SD € 9431.89) in the INT group. The annual cost difference between INT and TAU was € - 516.14 (SE 1124.95) which was not significant (p ≤ 0.05). We estimated the average QALY to be 0.759 (SD 0.073) in the TAU group and 0.763 (SD 0.072). The QALY difference between INT and TAU was 0.0037 (SE 0.0092) which was not significant (p ≤ 0.05). The incremental cost utility ratio (ICUR) indicated that the gain of one additional year in full health by means of the intervention was associated with the saving of € 139.49. However, the stochastic insecurity of the ICUR did not allow a unique decision about the cost-utility of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: More information on the economic value of the intervention for families with a parent with mental illness in comparison to treatment as usual in Germany is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02308462; German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00006806.