Cost-effectiveness analysis of a large jail-based methadone maintenance treatment continuation program in New Mexico.

The U.S. has the second-highest incarceration rate in the world and spends more than $80 billion annually to house inmates. The clinical research literature suggests that methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) is an effective method to treat opioid use disorders (OUD) and that jails are a potentially valuable environment to implement MMT. Currently, jail-based MMT is rarely implemented in practice, due in part to resource limitations and other economic considerations. The primary goal of this study was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of jail-based MMT using data from a unique MMT continuation program located in a large urban jail in New Mexico. Recidivism data were collected for a three-year period both before and after incarceration, and quasi-control groups were constructed from both substance-using and general populations within the jail. Base models show that inmates enrolled in jail-based MMT exhibited significantly fewer days of incarceration due to recidivism (29.33) than a group of inmates with OUDs who did not receive MMT. Economic estimates indicate that it cost significantly less ($23.49) to reduce an incarcerated day using jail-based MMT than incarceration per se ($116.49). To mitigate potential sample selection bias, we used both propensity-score-matching and difference-in-differences estimators, which provided comparable estimates when using the OUD non-MMT comparison group. Difference-in-differences models find that, on average, MMT reduced recidivism by 24.80 days and it cost $27.78 to reduce an incarcerated day using jail-based MMT. Assuming a willingness to pay threshold of the break-even cost of reducing one incarcerated day, we estimate a 93.3% probability that this MMT program is cost-effective. Results were not as strong or consistent when using other comparison groups (e.g., alcohol-detoxified and general-population inmates). Overall, results suggest that it costs substantially less to provide jail-based MMT than incarceration alone. Jail administrators and policymakers should consider incorporating MMT in other jail systems and settings.

The Economic Impact of Intensive Care Management for High-Cost Medically Complex Patients: An Evaluation of New Mexico's Care One Program.

High-cost, medically complex patients have been a challenging population to manage in the US health care system, in terms of both improving health outcomes and containing costs. This paper evaluated the economic impact of Care One, an intensive care management program (data analysis, evaluation, empanelment, specialist disease management, nurse case management, and social support) designed to target the most expensive 1% of patients in a university health care system. Data were collected for a cohort of high-cost, medically complex patients (N = 753) who received care management and a control group (N = 794) of similarly complex health system users who did not receive access to the program. A pre-post empirical model estimated the Care One program to be associated with a per-patient reduction in billed charges of $92,227 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $83,988 to $100,466). A difference-in-difference model, which utilized the control group, estimated a per-patient reduction in billing charges of $44,504 (95% CI: $29,195 to $59,813). Results suggest that care management for high-cost, medically complex patients in primary care can reduce costs compared to a control group. In addition, significant reversion to the mean is found, providing support for the use of a difference-in-difference estimator when evaluating health programs for high-cost, medically complex patients.

A cost comparison of travel models and behavioural telemedicine for rural, Native American populations in New Mexico.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to model the cost of delivering behavioural health services to rural Native American populations using telecommunications and compare these costs with the travel costs associated with providing equivalent care. METHODS: Behavioural telehealth costs were modelled using equipment, transmission, administrative and IT costs from an established telecommunications centre. Two types of travel models were estimated: a patient travel model and a physician travel model. These costs were modelled using the New Mexico resource geographic information system program (RGIS) and ArcGIS software and unit costs (e.g. fuel prices, vehicle depreciation, lodging, physician wages, and patient wages) that were obtained from the literature and US government agencies. RESULTS: The average per-patient cost of providing behavioural healthcare via telehealth was US$138.34, and the average per-patient travel cost was US$169.76 for physicians and US$333.52 for patients. Sensitivity analysis found these results to be rather robust to changes in imputed parameters and preliminary evidence of economies of scale was found. CONCLUSION: Besides the obvious benefits of increased access to healthcare and reduced health disparities, providing behavioural telehealth for rural Native American populations was estimated to be less costly than modelled equivalent care provided by travelling. Additionally, as administrative and coordination costs are a major component of telehealth costs, as programmes grow to serve more patients, the relative costs of these initial infrastructure as well as overall per-patient costs should decrease.