Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Cost-effectiveness of a Brief Structured Intervention Program Aimed at Preventing Repeat Suicide Attempts Among Those Who Previously Attempted Suicide: A Secondary Analysis of the ASSIP Randomized Clinical Trial.


ABSTRACT: Importance:This is the first cost-effectiveness analysis of a brief therapy, the Attempted Suicide Short Intervention Program (ASSIP), for individuals who attempt suicide. Objective:To explore the cost-effectiveness of the ASSIP intervention in the context of the Swiss health care system. Design, Setting, and Participants:In this economic evaluation, the cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from a health care perspective between January 2017 and April 2018 using data from a randomized clinical trial conducted between June 2009 and December 2014. Participants were individuals who had attempted suicide and were receiving treatment at a psychiatric university hospital in Switzerland that provides inpatient and outpatient services for suicide attempters referred from an emergency department of a general hospital. Interventions:The intervention group received 3 manual-based therapy sessions followed by regular personalized letters over 24 months. The control group was offered a single suicide risk assessment. Main Outcomes and Measures:The main economic analysis explored cost per suicide attempt avoided expressed in 2015 Swiss francs (CHF). Cost-effectiveness planes were plotted and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves calculated. Results:One hundred twenty participants (mean [SD] age, 37.8 [14.4] years; 66 [55%] women and 54 [45%] men) were assigned to an intervention group or a control group, each with 60 participants. At 24 months of follow-up, 5 suicide attempts were reported in the ASSIP group among 59 participants with follow-up data available, and 41 were reported in the control group among 53 participants with follow-up data available. The ASSIP group had higher intervention costs, with CHF 1323 vs CHF 441 for the control group. At 24 months of follow-up, psychiatric hospital costs were lower in the ASSIP group than in the control group, although this difference was not significant (mean [SD], CHF 20?559 [38?676] vs CHF 45?488 [73?306]; mean difference, CHF -16?081; 95% CI, CHF -34?717 to 1536; P?=?.11). General hospital costs were significantly lower for the ASSIP group. Total health care costs were also lower, but the difference was not significant (mean [SD], CHF 21?302 [38?819] vs 41?287 [74?310]; difference, CHF -12?604; 95% CI, CHF -29?837 to 625; P?=?.14). In a base-case analysis, ASSIP was dominant, with significantly fewer reattempts at lower overall cost. The intervention had a 96% chance of being less costly and more effective. A sensitivity analysis showed a 96% and 95% chance of ASSIP being more effective and less costly at willingness-to-pay levels of CHF 0 and CHF 30?000, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance:The ASSIP intervention is a cost-saving treatment for individuals who attempt suicide. The findings support the use of ASSIP as a treatment for suicide attempters. Further studies are needed to determine cost-effectiveness in other contexts. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02505373.

SUBMITTER: Park AL 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6324444 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of a Brief Structured Intervention Program Aimed at Preventing Repeat Suicide Attempts Among Those Who Previously Attempted Suicide: A Secondary Analysis of the ASSIP Randomized Clinical Trial.

Park A-La AL   Gysin-Maillart Anja A   Müller Thomas J TJ   Exadaktylos Aristomenis A   Michel Konrad K  

JAMA network open 20181005 6


<h4>Importance</h4>This is the first cost-effectiveness analysis of a brief therapy, the Attempted Suicide Short Intervention Program (ASSIP), for individuals who attempt suicide.<h4>Objective</h4>To explore the cost-effectiveness of the ASSIP intervention in the context of the Swiss health care system.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>In this economic evaluation, the cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from a health care perspective between January 2017 and April 2018 using data f  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC5101274 | biostudies-other
| S-EPMC6334515 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4697276 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4773217 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8138707 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4021719 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC3904271 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC3840723 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC9667229 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4021704 | biostudies-literature