Cost and cost-effectiveness of interim methadone treatment and patient navigation initiated in jail.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) who are released from pre-trial detention in jail have a high risk of opioid relapse. While several interventions for OUD initiated during incarceration have been studied, few have had an economic evaluation. As part of a three-group randomized trial, we estimated the cost and cost-effectiveness of a negative urine opioid test. Detainees were assigned to interim methadone (IM) in jail with continued methadone treatment post-release with and without 3 months of post-release patient navigation (PN) compared to an enhanced treatment-as-usual group.Methods
We implemented a micro-costing approach from the provider's perspective to estimate the cost per participant in jail and over the 12 months post-release from jail. Economic data included jail-based and community-based service utilization, self-reported healthcare utilization and justice system involvement, and administrative arrest records. Our outcome measure is the number of participants with a negative opioid urine test at their 12-month follow-up. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for intervention costs only and costs from a societal perspective.Results
The average cost of providing patient navigation services per individual beginning in jail and continuing in the community was $283. We find that IM is dominated by ETAU and IM + PN. Per additional participant with a negative opioid urine test, the ICER for IM + PN including intervention costs only is $91 and $305 including societal costs.Conclusions
IM + PN is almost certainly the cost-effective choice from both an intervention provider and societal perspective.
SUBMITTER: Zarkin GA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7736121 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundMethadone maintenance is an effective treatment for opioid dependence but is rarely initiated in US jails. Patient navigation is a promising approach to improve continuity of care but has not been tested in bridging the gap between jail- and community-based drug treatment programs.MethodsThis is an open-label randomized clinical trial among 300 adult opioid dependent newly-arrested detainees that will compare three treatment conditions: methadone maintenance without routine counseling (termed Interim Methadone; IM) initiated in jail v. IM and patient navigation v. enhanced treatment-as-usual. The two primary outcomes will be: (1) the rate of entry into treatment for opioid use disorder within 30days from release and (2) frequency of opioid positive urine tests over the 12-month follow-up period. An economic analysis will examine the costs, cost-effectiveness, and cost-benefit ratio of the study interventions.ResultsWe describe the background and rationale for the study, its aims, hypotheses, and study design.ConclusionsGiven the large number of opioid dependent detainees in the US and elsewhere, initiating IM at the time of incarceration could be a significant public health and clinical approach to reducing relapse, recidivism, HIV-risk behavior, and criminal behavior. An economic analysis will be conducted to assist policy makers in determining the utility of adopting this approach. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02334215.
| S-EPMC4969178 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsIn a recent randomized trial, patients with opioid dependence receiving brief intervention, emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine and ongoing follow-up in primary care with buprenorphine (buprenorphine) were twice as likely to be engaged in addiction treatment compared with referral to community-based treatment (referral) or brief intervention and referral (brief intervention). Our aim was to evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of these three methods of intervening on opioid dependence in the ED.DesignMeasured health-care use was converted to dollar values. We considered a health-care system perspective and constructed cost-effectiveness acceptability curves that indicate the probability each treatment is cost-effective under different thresholds of willingness-to-pay for outcomes studied.SettingAn urban ED in the United States.ParticipantsOpioid-dependent patients aged 18 years or older.MeasurementsSelf-reported 30-day assessment data were used to construct cost-effectiveness acceptability curves for patient engagement in formal addiction treatment at 30 days and the number of days illicit opioid-free in the past week.FindingsConsidering only health-care system costs, cost-effectiveness acceptability curves indicate that at all positive willingness-to-pay values, ED-initiated buprenorphine treatment was more cost-effective than brief intervention or referral. For example, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $1000 for 30-day treatment engagement, we are 79% certain ED-initiated buprenorphine is most cost-effective compared with other studied treatments. Similar results were found for days illicit opioid-free in the past week. Results were robust to secondary analyses that included patients with missing cost data, included crime and patient time costs in the numerator, and to changes in unit price estimates.ConclusionIn the United States, emergency department-initiated buprenorphine intervention for patients with opioid dependence provides high value compared with referral to community-based treatment or combined brief intervention and referral.
| S-EPMC5657503 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveStroke remains a leading cause of premature death, impairment and reduced quality of life. Its aftercare is performed by numerous different health care service providers, resulting in a high need for coordination. Personally delivered patient navigation (PN) is a promising approach for managing pathways through health care systems and for improving patient outcomes. Although PN in stroke care is evolving, no summarized information on its cost-effectiveness in stroke survivors is available. Hence, the aim of this systematic review is to analyze the level of evidence on the cost-effectiveness of PN for stroke survivors.MethodsA systematic literature search without time limitations was carried out in PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL as well as PsycINFO and supplemented by a manual search. Randomized controlled trials published prior to April 2020 in English or German were considered eligible if any results regarding the cost-effectiveness of PN for stroke survivors were reported. The review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Quality of included studies was assessed with the RoB2 tool. Main study characteristics and cost-effectiveness results were summarized and discussed.ResultsThe search identified 1442 records, and two studies met the inclusion criteria. Quality of included studies was rated moderate and high. Programs, settings and cost-effectiveness results were heterogeneous, with one study showing a 90% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness to pay of $25600 per QALY (health/social care perspective) and the other showing similar QALYs and higher costs.ConclusionsSince only two studies were eligible, this review reveals a large gap in knowledge regarding the cost-effectiveness of PN for stroke survivors. Furthermore, no conclusive statement about the cost-effectiveness can be made. Future attempts to evaluate PN for stroke survivors are necessary and should also involve cost-effectiveness issues.
| S-EPMC8519430 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although diacetylmorphine has been proven to be more effective than methadone maintenance treatment for opioid dependence, its direct costs are higher. We compared the cost-effectiveness of diacetylmorphine and methadone maintenance treatment for chronic opioid dependence refractory to treatment.We constructed a semi-Markov cohort model using data from the North American Opiate Medication Initiative trial, supplemented with administrative data for the province of British Columbia and other published data, to capture the chronic, recurrent nature of opioid dependence. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios to compare diacetylmorphine and methadone over 1-, 5-, 10-year and lifetime horizons.Diacetylmorphine was found to be a dominant strategy over methadone maintenance treatment in each of the time horizons. Over a lifetime horizon, our model showed that people receiving methadone gained 7.46 discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) on average (95% credibility interval [CI] 6.91-8.01) and generated a societal cost of $1.14 million (95% CI $736,800-$1.78 million). Those who received diacetylmorphine gained 7.92 discounted QALYs on average (95% CI 7.32-8.53) and generated a societal cost of $1.10 million (95% CI $724,100-$1.71 million). Cost savings in the diacetylmorphine cohort were realized primarily because of reductions in the costs related to criminal activity. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the probability of diacetylmorphine being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $0 per QALY gained was 76%; the probability was 95% at a threshold of $100,000 per QALY gained. Results were confirmed over a range of sensitivity analyses.Using mathematical modelling to extrapolate results from the North American Opiate Medication Initiative, we found that diacetylmorphine may be more effective and less costly than methadone among people with chronic opioid dependence refractory to treatment.
| S-EPMC3314060 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a hepatitis C (HCV) screening and active linkage to care intervention in US methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) patients using data from a randomized trial conducted in New York City and San Francisco.MethodsWe used a decision analytic model to compare 1) no intervention; 2) HCV screening and education (control); and 3) HCV screening, education, and care coordination (active linkage intervention). We also explored an alternative strategy wherein HCV/HIV co-infected participants linked elsewhere. Trial data include population characteristics (67% male, mean age 48, 58% HCV infected) and linkage rates. Data from published sources include treatment efficacy and HCV re-infection risk. We projected quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and lifetime medical costs using an established model of HCV (HEP-CE). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) are in 2015 US$/QALY discounted 3% annually.ResultsThe control strategy resulted in a projected 35% linking to care within 6 months and 31% achieving sustained virologic response (SVR). The intervention resulted in 60% linking and 54% achieving SVR with an ICER of $24,600/QALY compared to no intervention from the healthcare sector perspective and was a more efficient use of resources than the control strategy. The intervention had an ICER of $76,500/QALY compared to the alternative strategy. From a societal perspective, the intervention had a net monetary benefit of $511,000-$975,600.ConclusionsHCV care coordination interventions that include screening, education and active linkage to care in MMT settings are likely cost-effective at a conventional $100,000/QALY threshold for both HCV mono-infected and HIV co-infected patients.
| S-EPMC5889754 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underused by minority populations, and patient navigation increases adherence with screening colonoscopy. In this study, the authors estimated the cost-effectiveness of navigation for screening colonoscopy from the perspective of a payer seeking to improve population health.A validated model of CRC screening was informed with inputs from navigation studies in New York City (population: 43% African American, 49% Hispanic, 4% white, 4% other; base-case screening: 40% without navigation, 65% with navigation; navigation costs: $29 per colonoscopy completer, $21 per noncompleter, $3 per non-navigated individual). Two analyses compared: 1) navigation versus no navigation for 1-time screening colonoscopy in unscreened individuals aged ? 50 years; and 2) programs of colonoscopy with versus without navigation versus fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) or fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for individuals ages 50 to 80 years.In the base case: 1) 1-time navigation gained quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and decreased costs; 2) longitudinal navigation cost $9800 per QALY gained versus no navigation, and, assuming comparable uptake rates, it cost $118,700 per QALY gained versus FOBT but was less effective and more costly than FIT. The results were most dependent on screening participation rates and navigation costs: 1) assuming a 5% increase in screening uptake with navigation, and a navigation cost of $150 per completer, 1-time navigation cost $26,400 per QALY gained; and 2) longitudinal navigation with 75% colonoscopy uptake cost <$25,000 per QALY gained versus FIT when FIT uptake was <50%. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses did not alter the conclusions.Navigation for screening colonoscopy appears to be cost-effective, and 1-time navigation may be cost-saving. In emerging health care models that reward outcomes, payers should consider covering the costs of navigation for screening colonoscopy.
| S-EPMC4558196 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To assess the cost-effectiveness of implementing a patient navigation (PN) program with capitated payment for Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with lung cancer.Cost-effectiveness analysis.A Markov model to capture the disease progression of lung cancer and characterize clinical benefits of PN services as timeliness of treatment and care coordination. Taking a payer's perspective, we estimated the lifetime costs, life years (LYs), and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and addressed uncertainties in one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.Model inputs were extracted from the literature, supplemented with data from a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services demonstration project.Compared to usual care, PN services incurred higher costs but also yielded better outcomes. The incremental cost and effectiveness was $9,145 and 0.47 QALYs, respectively, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $19,312/QALY. One-way sensitivity analysis indicated that findings were most sensitive to a parameter capturing PN survival benefit for local-stage patients. CE-acceptability curve showed the probability that the PN program was cost-effective was 0.80 and 0.91 at a societal willingness-to-pay of $50,000 and $100,000/QALY, respectively.Instituting a capitated PN program is cost-effective for lung cancer patients in Medicare. Future research should evaluate whether the same conclusion holds in other cancers.
| S-EPMC4799903 | biostudies-other
Project description:We examined the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation treatment for psychiatric inpatients.Smokers, regardless of intention to quit, were recruited during psychiatric hospitalization and randomized to receive stage-based smoking cessation services or usual aftercare. Smoking cessation services, quality of life, and biochemically verified abstinence from cigarettes were assessed during 18 months of follow-up. A Markov model of cost-effectiveness over a lifetime horizon was constructed using trial findings and parameters obtained in a review of the literature on quit and relapse rates and the effect of smoking on health care cost, quality of life, and mortality.Among 223 smokers randomized between 2006 and 2008, the mean cost of smoking cessation services was $189 in the experimental treatment group and $37 in the usual care condition (P < .001). At the end of follow-up, 18.75% of the experimental group was abstinent from cigarettes, compared to 6.80% abstinence in the usual care group (P < .05). The model projected that the intervention added $43 in lifetime cost and generated 0.101 additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $428 per QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found the experimental intervention was cost-effective against the acceptance criteria of $50,000/QALY in 99.0% of the replicates.A cessation intervention for smokers identified in psychiatric hospitalization did not result in higher mental health care costs in the short-run and was highly cost-effective over the long-term. The stage-based intervention was a feasible and cost-effective way of addressing the high smoking prevalence in persons with serious mental illness.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00136812.
| S-EPMC4988964 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Colonoscopy is the most widely used colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test in the United States. Through the detection and removal of potentially precancerous polyps, it can prevent CRC. However, CRC screening remains low among adults who are recommended for screening. The New Hampshire Colorectal Cancer Screening Program implemented a patient navigation (PN) intervention to increase colonoscopy screening among low-income patients in health centers in New Hampshire. In the current study, the authors examined the cost-effectiveness of this intervention. METHODS:A decision tree model was constructed using Markov state transitions to calculate the costs and effectiveness associated with PN. Costs were calculated for the implementation of PN in a statewide public health program and in endoscopy centers. The main study outcome was colonoscopy screening completion. The main decision variable was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio associated with the PN intervention compared with usual care. RESULTS:The average cost per screening with PN was $1089 (95% confidence interval, $1075-$1103) compared with $894 with usual care (95% confidence interval, $886-$908). Among patients who were navigated, approximately 96.2% completed colonoscopy screening compared with 69.3% of those receiving usual care (odds ratio, 11.2; P <. 001). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio indicated that 1 additional screening completion cost approximately $725 in a public health program and $548 in an endoscopy center with PN compared with usual care, both of which are less than the average Medicare reimbursement of $737 for a colonoscopy procedure. CONCLUSIONS:PN was found to be cost-effective in increasing colonoscopy screening among low-income adults in the New Hampshire Colorectal Cancer Screening Program, even at the threshold of current Medicare reimbursement rates for colonoscopy. The results of the current study support the implementation of PN in statewide public health programs and endoscopy centers.
| S-EPMC6399743 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Innovations in hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy included in traditional comparative evaluations focus on sustained virologic response (SVR) without addressing challenges patients report beyond virologic cure. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of HCV drug therapy with a patient-centered approach. METHODS:An individual-based Markov model was constructed using guidance from a stakeholder advisory board (SAB), a patient Delphi panel, and published literature to evaluate direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) compared to no treatment. The United States (US) health sector and societal perspectives were considered for 10- and 20-year time horizons. Inputs for treatment costs and effectiveness reflect a generic regimen. Indirect costs used for the societal model included estimates from self-reported productivity in a matched-control sample. Beyond the traditional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) health outcome, this study included two novel measures developed from the Delphi panel and SAB: infected life-years and workdays missed. All costs were measured in 2018 US dollars. RESULTS:Health sector costs and QALYs were higher in the treatment group in both 10- and 20-year models. Total infected life-years and workdays missed were reduced in the treatment group for both models. When costs of absenteeism, presenteeism, and patient/caregiver time were included, the DAA intervention was cost-saving at both 10 and 20 years. Health sector results were sensitive to drug costs and utility estimates for post-SVR health states. Societal results were sensitive to presenteeism estimates and drug costs. CONCLUSION:Treatment was cost-effective from a health sector perspective and cost-saving when including non-health costs such as patient/caregiver time and productivity.
| S-EPMC7081653 | biostudies-literature