Angus, Colin, Li, Jinshuo orcid.org/0000-0003-1496-7450, Romero-Rodriguez, Esperanza et al. (3 more authors) (2019) Cost-effectiveness of strategies to improve delivery of brief interventions for heavy drinking in primary care::results from the ODHIN trial. European Journal of Public Health. pp. 219-225. ISSN 1101-1262
Abstract
Background Screening and brief interventions (SBIs) for heavy drinking are an effective and cost-effective approach to reducing alcohol-related harm, yet delivery rates remain low. This study uses trial data to estimate the cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies to increase SBI delivery. Methods Data from a large cluster-randomized trial were combined with the Sheffield Alcohol Policy Model, a policy appraisal tool, to estimate the cost-effectiveness of eight strategies to increase SBI delivery in primary care in England, Poland and the Netherlands: care as usual (control), training and support (TS), financial reimbursement (FR), referral of patients to an online brief intervention (eBI) and all combinations of TS, FR and eBI. cost-effectiveness was assessed from a healthcare perspective by comparing health benefits (measured in Quality-Adjusted Life Years) with total implementation costs and downstream healthcare savings for each strategy over a 30-year horizon and calculating Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results All trialled strategies were cost-effective compared to control. TS combined with FR was the most cost-effective approach in England (more effective and less costly than control) and Poland (ICER €4632 vs. next-best strategy). This combination is not cost-effective in the Netherlands, where TS alone is the most cost-effective approach (ICER €3386 vs. next-best strategy). Conclusions Structured TS, financial incentives and access to online interventions are all estimated to be cost-effective methods of improving delivery of alcohol brief interventions. TS and FR together may be the most cost-effective approach, however this is sensitive to country characteristics and alternative BI effect assumptions. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov
Metadata
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Authors/Creators: |
|
Copyright, Publisher and Additional Information: | © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details. |
Dates: |
|
Institution: | The University of York |
Academic Units: | The University of York > Faculty of Sciences (York) > Health Sciences (York) |
Depositing User: | Pure (York) |
Date Deposited: | 13 Sep 2018 09:20 |
Last Modified: | 17 Oct 2024 23:54 |
Published Version: | https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cky181 |
Status: | Published |
Refereed: | Yes |
Identification Number: | 10.1093/eurpub/cky181 |
Related URLs: | |
Open Archives Initiative ID (OAI ID): | oai:eprints.whiterose.ac.uk:135622 |
Downloads
Filename: ODHIN_C_E_Paper_EJPH_Submission_REVISED_accepted.docx
Description: ODHIN_C_E_Paper_EJPH_Submission_REVISED_accepted
Filename: Trial_analysis_EJPH_Supplementary_Material.docx
Description: Supplementary Material