Kosteneffektivität bedarfsorientierter Entlassungsplanung bei Menschen mit hoher Inanspruchnahme psychiatrischer Versorgung

Zusammenfassung

Anliegen: Überprüfung der Kosteneffektivität bedarfsorientierter Entlassungsplanung bei Menschen mit hoher Inanspruchnahme psychiatrischer Versorgung.

Methode: Im Rahmen einer multizentrischen klinischen Studie (n = 458) wurden direkte und indirekte Kosten (CSSRI-EU) sowie qualitätsadjustierte Lebensjahre (EQ-5D) erfasst.

Ergebnisse: Während eines 18-Monats-Zeitraums nach einem psychiatrischen Krankenhausaufenthalt unterschieden sich weder Kosten noch QALYs signifikant nach Gruppenzugehörigkeit (Intervention vs. Kontrolle).

Schlussfolgerungen: Die Intervention stellt keine kosteneffektive Alternative zur Routineentlassung dar.

Abstract

Objective: To establish the cost-effectiveness of needs-oriented discharge planning in high utilizers of mental health services.

Methods: As part of a multicenter RCT (n = 458), costs were measured via the German version of the „Client Sociodemographic and Service Receipt Inventory“ (CSSRI-EU), and the EQ-5 D was used to ascertain QALYs. Cost-effectiveness analysis included deriving incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and plotting them onto the cost-effectiveness plane as well as examining cost-effectiveness acceptability taking into account willingness-to-pay.

Results: During an 18-month period after discharge from inpatient psychiatric treatment, neither total direct and indirect costs (44,278 € vs. 43,302 €) nor quality-adjusted life years (0.960 vs. 0.958 QALYs) significantly differed by participant allocation to intervention or control groups. Also inspection of ICERs showed that the intervention had no economic advantage over standard care.

Conclusions: The intervention is no cost-effective alternative to standard care. Future studies aiming to improve organization of mental care should be considerate of institutional context.

Schlüsselwörter

hohe Inanspruchnahme - Kosteneffektivität - Entlassungsplanung - randomisierte kontrollierte Studie - qualitätsadjustierte Lebensjahre

Keywords

high utilizers - cost effectiveness - discharge planning - randomized controlled trial - quality-adjusted life years - needs

• Literatur

• 1 Mistiaen P, Francke AL, Poot E. Interventions aimed at reducing problems in adult patients discharged from hospital to home: A systematic meta-review. BMC Health Serv Res 2007; 7: 47
• 2 Shepperd S, McClaren J, Phillips CO et al. Discharge planning from hospital to home. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; Art. No CD000313
• 3 Steffen S, Kösters M, Becker T et al. Discharge planning in mental health care: a systematic review of the recent literature. Acta Psych Scand 2009; 120: 1-9
• 4 Puschner B, Steffen S, Völker KA et al. Needs-oriented discharge planning for high utilisers of psychiatric services: multicentre randomised controlled trial. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci 2011; 20: 181-192
• 5 Weisbrod BA, Test MA, Stein LI. Alternative to mental hospital treatment. II. Economic benefit-cost analysis. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1980; 37: 400-405
• 6 Latimer EA. Economic impacts of assertive community treatment: a review of the literature. Can J Psychiatry 1999; 44: 443-454
• 7 Latimer EA. Economic impacts of supported employment for persons with severe mental illness. Can J Psychiatry 2001; 46: 496-505
• 8 Rosenheck RA, Neale MS. Cost-effectiveness of intensive psychiatric community care for high users of inpatient services. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1998; 55: 459-466
• 9 Quinlivan R, Hough R, Crowell A et al. Service utilization and costs of care for severely mentally ill clients in an intensive case management program. Psychiatr Serv 1995; 46: 365-371
• 10 Bond GR, Witheridge TF, Dincin J et al. Assertive community treatment for frequent users of psychiatric hospitals in a large city: a controlled study. Am J Community Psychol 1990; 18: 865-891
• 11 Borland A, McRae J, Lycan C. Outcomes of five years of continuous intensive case management. Hosp Community Psychiatry 1989; 40: 369-376
• 12 Priebe S, Jones G, McCabe R et al. Effectiveness and costs of acute day hospital treatment compared with conventional in-patient care: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry 2006; 188: 243-249
• 13 Schmidt-Kraepelin C, Janssen B, Gaebel W. Prevention of rehospitalization in schizophrenia: results of an integrated care project in Germany. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2009; 259 (Suppl. 02) S205-S212
• 14 Forchuk C, Martin ML, Chan YL et al. Therapeutic relationships: From psychiatric hospital to community. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs 2005; 12: 556-564
• 15 Jones K, Colson PW, Holter MC et al. Cost-effectiveness of critical time intervention to reduce homelessness among persons with mental illness. Psychiatr Serv 2003; 54: 884-890
• 16 Susser E, Valencia E, Conover S et al. Preventing recurrent homelessness among mentally ill men: a “critical time” intervention after discharge from a shelter. Am J Public Health 1997; 87: 256-262
• 17 Jones K, Colson PW, Holter MC et al. Cost-effectiveness of critical time intervention to reduce homelessness among persons with mental illness. Psychiatr Serv 2003; 54: 884-890
• 18 Steffen S, Puschner B, Becker T. Bedarfsorientiertes Planen und Monitoring der Krankenhausentlassung für Patienten mit hoher Inanspruchnahme psychiatrischer Versorgung (NODPAM): Interventionsmanual. 2006 http://www.uni-ulm.de/psychiatrieII/download/interventionsmanual_2006_08_31.pdf Zugriff am 15.11.2011
• 19 Puschner B, Steffen S, Gaebel W et al. Needs-oriented discharge planning and monitoring for high utilisers of psychiatric services (NODPAM): Design and methods. BMC Health Serv Res 2008; 8: 152
• 20 Steffen S, Kalkan R, von Rad K et al. Entlassungsplanung bei Menschen mit hoher Inanspruchnahme psychiatrischer Versorgung in einer randomisierten kontrollierten Multicenterstudie: Durchführung und Qualität der Intervention. Psychiat Prax 2011; 38: 69-76
• 21 von Rad K, Steffen S, Kalkan R et al. Entlassungsplanung bei Menschen mit hoher Inanspruchnahme psychiatrischer Versorgung in einer randomisierten kontrollierten Multicenterstudie: Entwicklung und Beschreibung der Intervention (RCT on discharge planning for high utilisers of mental health care: Development and description of the intervention). Psychiat Prax 2010; 37: 191-195
• 22 Roick C, Kilian R, Matschinger H et al. Die deutsche Version des Client Sociodemographic and Service Receipt Inventory: Ein Instrument zur Erfassung psychiatrischer Versorgungskosten. Psychiat Prax 2001; 28: 84-90
• 23 Krauth C, Hessel F, Hansmeier T et al. Empirische Bewertungssätze in der gesundheitsökonomischen Evaluation – ein Vorschlag der AG Methoden der gesundheitsökonomischen Evaluation (AG MEG). Gesundheitswesen 2005; 67: 736-746
• 24 Melchinger H. Strukturfragen der ambulanten psychiatrischen Versorgung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Psychiatrischen Institutsambulanzen und der sozialpsychiatrischen Versorgung außerhalb der Leistungspflicht der Gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung – Gutachten im Auftrag der Kassenärztlichen Bundesvereinigung (KBV). 2008 http://dgsp-brandenburg.de/sites/default/files/Melchinger_KBV_Gutachten.pdf Zugriff am 16.11.2011
• 25 Krauth C, Hessel F, Wasem J et al. Empirische Bewertungssätze in der gesundheitsökonomischen Evaluation – ein Vorschlag der AG Methoden der gesundheitsökonomischen Evaluation (AG MEG). Gesundheitswesen 2005; 67: 736-746
• 26 The EuroQol Group. EuroQol – a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Pol 1990; 16: 199-208
• 27 Graf JM, Claes C, Greiner W et al. Die deutsche Version des EuroQol-Fragebogens. J Publ Health 1998; 6: 3-20
• 28 Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Pol 1996; 37: 53-72
• 29 Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med 2001; 33: 337-343
• 30 Szende A, Oppe M, Devlin N. EQ-5D value sets: inventory, comparative review and user guide. Dordrecht: Springer; 2007
• 31 Prieto L, Novick D, Sacristan JA et al. on behalf of the SOHO Study Group. A rasch model analysis to test the cross-cultural validity of the EuroQoL-5D in the schizophrenia outpatient health outcome study. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2003; 107: 24-29
• 32 Gunther OH, Roick C, Angermeyer MC et al. Responsiveness of EQ-5D utility indices in alcohol-dependent patients. Drug Alcohol Depend 2008; 92: 291-295
• 33 Gunther OH, Roick C, Angermeyer MC et al. The responsiveness of EQ-5D utility scores in patients with depression: A comparison with instruments measuring quality of life, psychopathology and social functioning. J Affect Disord 2008; 105: 81-91
• 34 Barton GR, Hodgekins J, Mugford M et al. Measuring the benefits of treatment for psychosis: validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D. Br J Psychiatry 2009; 195: 170-177
• 35 König HH, Gunther OH, Angermeyer MC et al. Utility assessment in patients with mental disorders: validity and discriminative ability of the time trade-off method. Pharmacoeconomics 2009; 27: 405-419
• 36 König HH, Born A, Gunther O et al. Validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D in assessing and valuing health status in patients with anxiety disorders. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2010; 8: 47
• 37 EuroQol Group. EQ-5D-3L User Guide: Basic information on how to use the EQ-5D-3L instrument. 2011 http://www.euroqol.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Documenten/PDF/Folders_Flyers/UserGuide_EQ-5D-3L.pdf Zugriff am 6.7.2012
• 38 Salize HJ, Kilian R. Gesundheitsökonomie in der Psychiatrie: Konzepte, Methoden, Analysen. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer; 2010
• 39 Kilian R. Die Anwendung der Kosteneffektivitätsanalyse in der psychiatrischen Versorgungsforschung: Methodische Probleme und Lösungsansätze. Psychiat Prax 2007; 34: 138-139
• 40 Eichler HG, Kong SX, Gerth WC et al. Use of cost-effectiveness analysis in health-care resource allocation decision-making: how are cost-effectiveness thresholds expected to emerge?. Value Health 2004; 7: 518-528
• 41 Sturm R. The myth of medical cost offset. Psychiatr Serv 2004; 52: 738-740
• 42 Zentner N, Baumgartner I, Becker T et al. Kosten medizinischer Leistungen bei Menschen mit schwerer psychischer Erkrankung: Selbstbericht vs. Kostenträgerangaben. Psychiat Prax 2012; 39: 122-128