Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol ; 31(9): 578-596, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34705525

ABSTRACT

Objectives: This systematic review provides an overview of full economic evaluations of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treatments, evaluates their outcomes, and highlights gaps in the literature. Data Sources: Electronic databases were searched for full economic evaluations of ADHD treatments for children, adolescents, or adults published in English or Dutch. Results: Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Almost all studies that compared medication or psychosocial treatment to no treatment, placebo, or care as usual indicated that medication and psychosocial treatment were cost-effective compared to the control group. Stimulant treatment appeared to be cost-effective for the treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents. Only few studies focus on treatments in adults and psychosocial treatments and the number of studies with long time horizons and without industry funding is limited. Conclusions: Despite the rising interest in cost-effectiveness, this systematic review shows that more cost-effectiveness research of higher quality is warranted to aid in the optimal use of available treatments and resources for individuals with ADHD. Specifically, more studies should focus on treatments in adults and psychosocial treatments, and more studies with long time horizons and without industry funding are warranted. Nevertheless, we can conclude that treating ADHD is generally cost-effective compared to no treatment. PROSPERO: CRD42017060074. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=60074.


Subject(s)
Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity , Central Nervous System Stimulants , Adolescent , Adult , Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity/drug therapy , Central Nervous System Stimulants/therapeutic use , Child , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans
2.
BMJ Open ; 11(3): e048020, 2021 03 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33753448

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Studies in clinical settings showed a potential relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and lifestyle factors with COVID-19, but it is still unknown whether this holds in the general population. In this study, we investigated the associations of SES with self-reported, tested and diagnosed COVID-19 status in the general population. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants were 49 474 men and women (46±12 years) residing in the Northern Netherlands from the Lifelines cohort study. SES indicators and lifestyle factors (i.e., smoking status, physical activity, alcohol intake, diet quality, sleep time and TV watching time) were assessed by questionnaire from the Lifelines Biobank. Self-reported, tested and diagnosed COVID-19 status was obtained from the Lifelines COVID-19 questionnaire. RESULTS: There were 4711 participants who self-reported having had a COVID-19 infection, 2883 participants tested for COVID-19, and 123 positive cases were diagnosed in this study population. After adjustment for age, sex, lifestyle factors, body mass index and ethnicity, we found that participants with low education or low income were less likely to self-report a COVID-19 infection (OR [95% CI]: low education 0.78 [0.71 to 0.86]; low income 0.86 [0.79 to 0.93]) and be tested for COVID-19 (OR [95% CI]: low education 0.58 [0.52 to 0.66]; low income 0.86 [0.78 to 0.95]) compared with high education or high income groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the low SES group was the most vulnerable population to self-reported and tested COVID-19 status in the general population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , Social Class , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands/epidemiology , Risk Factors , Self Report
3.
J Occup Rehabil ; 31(1): 84-91, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32816203

ABSTRACT

Purpose Vocational rehabilitation (VR) is a widely used intervention aimed to optimize work participation for patients on sick leave due to chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP). Economic evaluations of care as usual VR are scarce, and may provide relevant information to guide clinical, reimbursement and policy decisions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term cost-effectiveness and return on investment (ROI) of VR for patients on sick leave due to CMP with an additional work module (VR+) compared to VR without work module, from a societal and employers' perspective. Methods A retrospective longitudinal cohort study within a Dutch care as usual context was applied. Participants with CMP and decreased work participation originating from seven Dutch rehabilitation centers were included in this study. Participants underwent VR or VR+. Main data sources at baseline and discharge: Quality-adjusted life year (QALY) based on EQ-5D, intervention costs, self-reported productivity and health care utilization. Main analyses cost-effectiveness, including incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC); and ROI analyses with use of the human capital method. Results N = 324 participants were analyzed. The results show that VR+ was cost-effective compared to VR: mean cost savings of €820 per 0.012 QALY gained. CEAC suggests probability of VR+ being cost-effective is > 0.91 for thresholds of €20.000 and higher. The mean ROI of VR+ for employers was 38%. Conclusion It was concluded that at discharge, VR+ was cost-effective compared to VR. ROI was positive for employers.


Subject(s)
Musculoskeletal Pain , Rehabilitation, Vocational , Chronic Pain , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies
4.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 20(1): 1113, 2020 Dec 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33267875

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Previous studies on the persistence of child and adolescent mental healthcare do not consider the role of time-invariant individual characteristics. Estimating persistence of healthcare using standard linear models yields biased estimates due to unobserved heterogeneity and the autoregressive structure of the model. This study provides estimates of the persistence of child and adolescent mental healthcare taking these statistical issues into account. METHODS: We use registry data of more than 80,000 Dutch children and adolescents between 2000 and 2012 from the Psychiatric Case Registry Northern Netherlands (PCR-NN). In order to account for autocorrelation due to the presence of a lagged dependent variable and to distinguish between persistence caused by time-invariant individual characteristics and a direct care effect we use difference GMM-IV estimation. In further analyses we assess the robustness of our results to policy reforms, different definitions of care and diagnosis decomposition. RESULTS: All estimation results for the direct care effect (true state-dependence) show a positive coefficient smaller than unity with a main effect of 0.215 (p<0.01), which indicates that the process is stable. Persistence of care is found to be 0.065 (p<0.05) higher for females. Additionally, the majority of persistence of care appears to be associated with time-invariant characteristics. Further analyses indicate that (1) results are robust to different definitions of care and (2) persistence of care does not differ significantly across subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that the majority of mental healthcare persistence for children and adolescents is due to time-invariant individuals characteristics. Additionally, we find that in the absence of further shocks a sudden increase of 10 care contacts in the present year is associated with an average of less than 3 additional care contacts at some point in the future. This result provides essential information about the necessity of budget increases for future years in the case of exogenous increases in healthcare use.


Subject(s)
Family , Mental Health Services , Adolescent , Child , Female , Forecasting , Humans , Netherlands/epidemiology , Registries
5.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) ; 45(20): 1443-1450, 2020 Oct 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32502071

ABSTRACT

STUDY DESIGN: A before and after study cohort study. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine changes in health care costs after multidisciplinary spine care in patients with complex chronic back pain (CBP), to analyze the predictive value of patient and disease characteristics on health care costs, and to study the potential impact of biases concerning the use of real world data. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Due to high direct and indirect societal costs of back pain there is a need for interventions that can assist in reducing the economic burden on patients and society. METHODS: All patients referred to a university-based spine center insured at a major health care insurer in the Netherlands were invited. Personal and disease-related data were collected at baseline. Health care costs were retrieved from the health care insurer from 2 years before to 2 years after intervention. Repeated measures analysis of variances were calculated to study changes in health care costs after intervention. Multivariable regression analyses and cluster robust fixed effect models were applied to predict characteristics on health care costs. To study regression to the mean, a fixed effect model was calculated comparing 2 years before and 2 years post-intervention. RESULTS: In total 428,158 declarations during 4.6 years were filed by 997 participants (128,666 considered CBP-related). CBP-related costs significantly increased during the intervention period and reduced 2 years after the intervention. Total health care costs kept rising. The intervention was associated with a 21% to 34% (P < 0.01) reduction in costs depending on the model used. Reduction in costs was related to being male and lower body mass index. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that reduction in CBP-related health care utilization in patients with complex CBP can be achieved after a multidisciplinary spine intervention. The results are robust to controlling for background characteristics and are unlikely to be fully driven by regression to the mean. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.


Subject(s)
Back Pain/economics , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Cohort Studies , Delivery of Health Care/economics , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Patients , Referral and Consultation
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...