Cost-effectiveness of the strong African American families-teen program: 1-year follow-up

Rural and Frontier Communities

Children and adolescents in rural communities have statistically more unmet mental health needs and fewer mental health resources than their urban counterparts. The rural population is ill-served by the traditional medical model of hyperspecialization and would benefit more from a population-based approach. By embracing the community, including each area's distinct culture, mental health providers can best affect change in these areas. Increased pediatric integration via telepsychiatry, including clear and codified teleprescribing parameters for controlled substances, can reach more rural youth and eliminate current burdens to primary care providers who currently treat most rural mental illness.

Effectiveness of strategies to reduce risky alcohol consumption among youth living in rural or remote areas: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies to reduce risky alcohol consumption among youth living in rural and remote areas.

INTRODUCTION

Youth living in rural and remote areas are more likely to drink alcohol and experience alcohol-related harm than youth living in urban locations. This review assessed the effectiveness of strategies to reduce young people's risky alcohol consumption in rural and remote areas.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

We considered papers that included youth (aged 12 to 24 years; also referred to in this review as young people ) who were identified as living in rural or remote locations. Any intervention or strategy designed to reduce or prevent alcohol consumption among this population was included. The primary outcome was frequency of short-term risky alcohol consumption as measured by self-reported incidents of drinking 5 or more standard drinks in 1 session.

METHODS

We conducted this systematic review in accordance with the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of effectiveness. We searched for published and unpublished English-language studies and gray literature from 1999 to December 2021. Two authors screened titles and abstracts before full-text screening and data extraction. Two authors reviewed the extracted data to identify studies that reported duplicate data (eg, due to progressive publication of longitudinal data sets) and, where multiple studies reported the same data set, the study with the measure most proximal to the primary outcome measure and/or with the longest follow-up was selected. Two authors then critically appraised the studies. There were no interventions that were assessed for impact on the primary outcome in more than 1 study; in turn, the feasibility and utility of statistical pooling and the Summary of Findings were limited. Instead, results and certainty of evidence is provided in narrative format.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight articles reporting on 16 studies were included in the review: 10 randomized controlled trials, 4 quasi-experimental studies, and 2 cohort studies. All studies except 1 were conducted in the United States. Only 3 studies measured the primary outcome of short-term risky alcohol consumption and included a comparison group. A meta-analysis of 2 of these studies showed that interventions that included motivational interviewing had a small and non-significant effect on short-term risky alcohol consumption among Indigenous youth in the United States. Meta-analyses of the effect of a variety of interventions on secondary outcomes demonstrated that intervention was not more effective than control for reducing past month drunkenness; however, intervention was more effective for reducing past month alcohol use (odds radio 0.3; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.67; P =0.003). The heterogeneity of effects was evident within these meta-analyses as well as in the studies unable to be meta-analyzed.

CONCLUSION

Based on this review, no interventions can be broadly recommended for reducing short-term risky alcohol consumption among youth in rural and remote areas. Further research to increase the robustness of available evidence in relation to the effectiveness of strategies to reduce short-term risky alcohol consumption among youth in rural and remote areas is urgently required.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020167834.

Economic Evaluation Design within the HEAL Prevention Cooperative

The rapid rise in opioid misuse, disorder, and opioid-involved deaths among older adolescents and young adults is an urgent public health problem. Prevention is a vital part of the nation's response to the opioid crisis, yet preventive interventions for those at risk for opioid misuse and opioid use disorder are scarce. In 2019, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) launched the Preventing Opioid Use Disorder in Older Adolescents and Young Adults cooperative as part of its broader Helping to End Addiction Long-term (HEAL) Initiative ( https://heal.nih.gov/ ). The HEAL Prevention Cooperative (HPC) includes ten research projects funded with the goal of developing effective prevention interventions across various settings (e.g., community, health care, juvenile justice, school) for older adolescent and young adults at risk for opioid misuse and opioid use disorder (OUD). An important component of the HPC is the inclusion of an economic evaluation by nine of these research projects that will provide information on the costs, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability of these interventions. The HPC economic evaluation is integrated into each research project's overall design with start-up costs and ongoing delivery costs collected prospectively using an activity-based costing approach. The primary objectives of the economic evaluation are to estimate the intervention implementation costs to providers, estimate the cost-effectiveness of each intervention for reducing opioid misuse initiation and escalation among youth, and use simulation modeling to estimate the budget impact of broader implementation of the interventions within the various settings over multiple years. The HPC offers an extraordinary opportunity to generate economic evidence for substance use prevention programming, providing policy makers and providers with critical information on the investments needed to start-up prevention interventions, as well as the cost-effectiveness of these interventions relative to alternatives. These data will help demonstrate the valuable role that prevention can play in combating the opioid crisis.

Interventions to prevent alcohol use: systematic review of economic evaluations

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use is a leading risk factor for death and disability worldwide.

AIMS

We conducted a systematic review on the cost-effectiveness evidence for interventions to prevent alcohol use across the lifespan.

METHOD

Electronic databases (EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL and EconLit) were searched for full economic evaluations and return-on-investment studies of alcohol prevention interventions published up to May 2021. The methods and results of included studies were evaluated with narrative synthesis, and study quality was assessed by the Drummond ten-point checklist.

RESULTS

A total of 69 studies met the inclusion criteria for a full economic evaluation or return-on-investment study. Most studies targeted adults or a combination of age groups, seven studies comprised children/adolescents and one involved older adults. Half of the studies found that alcohol prevention interventions are cost-saving (i.e. more effective and less costly than the comparator). This was especially true for universal prevention interventions designed to restrict exposure to alcohol through taxation or advertising bans; and selective/indicated prevention interventions, which involve screening with or without brief intervention for at-risk adults. School-based interventions combined with parent/carer interventions were cost-effective in preventing alcohol use among those aged under 18 years. No interventions were cost-effective for preventing alcohol use in older adults.

CONCLUSIONS

Alcohol prevention interventions show promising evidence of cost-effectiveness. Further economic analyses are needed to facilitate policy-making in low- and middle-income countries, and among child, adolescent and older adult populations.

Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses of a web-based computer-tailored intervention for prevention of binge drinking among Spanish adolescents

BACKGROUND

Binge drinking (BD) among adolescents is a public health concern worldwide. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of a web-based computer-tailored intervention to prevent BD in adolescence.

METHODS

The sample was drawn from a study evaluating the Alerta Alcohol program. The population consisted of adolescents 15 to 19 years of age. Data were recorded at baseline (January to February 2016) and after 4 months (May to June 2017) and were used to estimate costs and health outcomes, as measured by the number of BD occasions and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios were calculated from National Health Service (NHS) and societal perspectives and for a time horizon of 4 months. A multivariate deterministic sensitivity analysis of best/worst scenarios by subgroups was used to account for uncertainty.

RESULTS

The cost of reducing BD occasions by one per month was €16.63 from the NHS perspective, which from the societal perspective resulted in savings of €7986.37. From the societal perspective, the intervention resulted in an incremental cost of €71.05 per QALY gained from the NHS perspective and this was dominant, resulting in savings of €34,126.64 per QALY gained in comparison with the control group. Subgroup analyses showed that the intervention was dominant for girls from both the perspectives and for individuals 17 years or older from the NHS perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

Computer-tailored feedback is a cost-effective way to reduce BD and increase QALYs among adolescents. However, long-term follow-up is needed to evaluate more fully changes in both BD and health-related quality of life.

Family-based prevention programmes for alcohol use in young people

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use in young people is a risk factor for a range of short- and long-term harms and is a cause of concern for health services, policy-makers, youth workers, teachers, and parents.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of universal, selective, and indicated family-based prevention programmes in preventing alcohol use or problem drinking in school-aged children (up to 18 years of age).Specifically, on these outcomes, the review aimed:• to assess the effectiveness of universal family-based prevention programmes for all children up to 18 years ('universal interventions');• to assess the effectiveness of selective family-based prevention programmes for children up to 18 years at elevated risk of alcohol use or problem drinking ('selective interventions'); and• to assess the effectiveness of indicated family-based prevention programmes for children up to 18 years who are currently consuming alcohol, or who have initiated use or regular use ('indicated interventions').

SEARCH METHODS

We identified relevant evidence from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid 1966 to June 2018), Embase (1988 to June 2018), Education Resource Information Center (ERIC; EBSCOhost; 1966 to June 2018), PsycINFO (Ovid 1806 to June 2018), and Google Scholar. We also searched clinical trial registers and handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster RCTs (C-RCTs) involving the parents of school-aged children who were part of the general population with no known risk factors (universal interventions), were at elevated risk of alcohol use or problem drinking (selective interventions), or were already consuming alcohol (indicated interventions). Psychosocial or educational interventions involving parents with or without involvement of children were compared with no intervention, or with alternate (e.g. child only) interventions, allowing experimental isolation of parent components.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 46 studies (39,822 participants), with 27 classified as universal, 12 as selective, and seven as indicated. We performed meta-analyses according to outcome, including studies reporting on the prevalence, frequency, or volume of alcohol use. The overall quality of evidence was low or very low, and there was high, unexplained heterogeneity.Upon comparing any family intervention to no intervention/standard care, we found no intervention effect on the prevalence (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.08 to 0.08; studies = 12; participants = 7490; I² = 57%; low-quality evidence) or frequency (SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.83 to 0.21; studies = 8; participants = 1835; I² = 96%; very low-quality evidence) of alcohol use in comparison with no intervention/standard care. The effect of any parent/family interventions on alcohol consumption volume compared with no intervention/standard care was very small (SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.00; studies = 5; participants = 1825; I² = 42%; low-quality evidence).When comparing parent/family and adolescent interventions versus interventions with young people alone, we found no difference in alcohol use prevalence (SMD -0.39, 95% CI -0.91 to 0.14; studies = 4; participants = 5640; I² = 99%; very low-quality evidence) or frequency (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.42 to 0.09; studies = 4; participants = 915; I² = 73%; very low-quality evidence). For this comparison, no trials reporting on the volume of alcohol use could be pooled in meta-analysis.In general, the results remained consistent in separate subgroup analyses of universal, selective, and indicated interventions. No adverse effects were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review indicate that there are no clear benefits of family-based programmes for alcohol use among young people. Patterns differ slightly across outcomes, but overall, the variation, heterogeneity, and number of analyses performed preclude any conclusions about intervention effects. Additional independent studies are required to strengthen the evidence and clarify the marginal effects observed.

Systematic review of economic evaluations of interventions for high risk young people

Background

The aim of this systematic literature review is to identify and critique full economic evaluations of interventions for high risk young people with the purpose of informing the design of future rigorous economic evaluations of such intervention programs.

Methods

A PRISMA compliant search of the literature between 2000 and April 2018 was conducted to identify full economic evaluations of youth focussed interventions for at risk young people. Duplicates were removed and two researchers independently screened the article titles and abstracts according to PICOS criteria for exclusion and inclusion. The remaining full text articles were assessed for eligibility and a quality assessment of the included articles was conducted using the Drummond checklist.

Results

The database, grey literature and hand searches located 488 studies of interventions for at risk young people. After preliminary screening of titles and abstracts, 104 studies remained for full text examination and 29 empirical studies containing 32 separate economic evaluations were judged eligible for inclusion in the review. These comprised 13 cost-benefit analyses (41%), 17 cost-effectiveness analyses (53%), one cost-utility analysis (3%) and a social return on investment (3%). Three main methodological challenges were identified: 1. attribution of effects; 2. measuring and valuing outcomes; and 3. identifying relevant costs and consequences.

Conclusions

A cost-benefit analysis would best capture the dynamic nature of a multi-component intervention for high risk young people, incorporating broader intersectoral outcomes and enabling measurement of more domains of risk. Prospective long-term data collection and a strong study design that incorporates a control group contribute to the quality of economic evaluation. Extrapolation of impact into the future is important for this population, in order to account for the time lag in effect of many impacts and benefits arising from youth interventions.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3450-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Economic evaluations of alcohol prevention interventions: Is the evidence sufficient? A review of methodological challenges

•

There are few economic evaluations of alcohol prevention interventions.

•

Consideration of impacts beyond an individual’s health in evaluations is limited.

•

No published studies using other priority-setting methods in the alcohol area.

•

Consideration of wider societal perspectives and health inequalities is minimal.

•

Including inter-sectoral costs and consequences in evaluations is challenging.

Public health interventions have unique characteristics compared to health technologies, which present additional challenges for economic evaluation (EE). High quality EEs that are able to address the particular methodological challenges are important for public health decision-makers. In England, they are even more pertinent given the transition of public health responsibilities in 2013 from the National Health Service to local government authorities where new agents are shaping policy decisions.

Addressing alcohol misuse is a globally prioritised public health issue. This article provides a systematic review of EE and priority-setting studies for interventions to prevent and reduce alcohol misuse published internationally over the past decade (2006–2016). This review appraises the EE and priority-setting evidence to establish whether it is sufficient to meet the informational needs of public health decision-makers.

619 studies were identified via database searches. 7 additional studies were identified via hand searching journals, grey literature and reference lists. 27 met inclusion criteria. Methods identified included cost-utility analysis (18), cost-effectiveness analysis (6), cost-benefit analysis (CBA) (1), cost-consequence analysis (CCA) (1) and return-on-investment (1). The review identified a lack of consideration of methodological challenges associated with evaluating public health interventions and limited use of methods such as CBA and CCA which have been recommended as potentially useful for EE in public health. No studies using other specific priority-setting tools were identified.

A Web-Based Computer-Tailored Alcohol Prevention Program for Adolescents: Cost-Effectiveness and Intersectoral Costs and Benefits

Background

Preventing excessive alcohol use among adolescents is important not only to foster individual and public health, but also to reduce alcohol-related costs inside and outside the health care sector. Computer tailoring can be both effective and cost-effective for working with many lifestyle behaviors, yet the available information on the cost-effectiveness of computer tailoring for reducing alcohol use by adolescents is limited as is information on the costs and benefits pertaining to sectors outside the health care sector, also known as intersectoral costs and benefits (ICBs).

Objective

The aim was to assess the cost-effectiveness of a Web-based computer-tailored intervention for reducing alcohol use and binge drinking by adolescents from a health care perspective (excluding ICBs) and from a societal perspective (including ICBs).

Methods

Data used were from the Alcoholic Alert study, a cluster randomized controlled trial with randomization at the level of schools into two conditions. Participants either played a game with tailored feedback on alcohol awareness after the baseline assessment (intervention condition) or received care as usual (CAU), meaning that they had the opportunity to play the game subsequent to the final measurement (waiting list control condition). Data were recorded at baseline (T0=January/February 2014) and after 4 months (T1=May/June 2014) and were used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), both from a health care perspective and a societal perspective. Stochastic uncertainty in the data was dealt with by using nonparametric bootstraps (5000 simulated replications). Additional sensitivity analyses were conducted based on excluding cost outliers. Subgroup cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted based on several background variables, including gender, age, educational level, religion, and ethnicity.

Results

From both the health care perspective and the societal perspective for both outcome measures, the intervention was more costly and more effective in comparison with CAU. ICERs differed for both perspectives, namely €40 and €79 from the health care perspective to €62 and €144 for the societal perspective per incremental reduction of one glass of alcohol per week and one binge drinking occasion per 30 days, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed, from both perspectives and for both outcome measures, that the intervention was cost-effective for older adolescents (aged 17-19 years) and those at a lower educational level and, from a health care perspective, the male and nonreligious adolescent subgroups.

Conclusions

Computer-tailored feedback could be a cost-effective way to target alcohol use and binge drinking among adolescents. Including ICBs in the economic evaluation had an impact on the cost-effectiveness results of the analysis. It could be worthwhile to aim the intervention specifically at specific subgroups.

Trial Registration

Nederlands Trial Register: NTR4048; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=4048 (Archived by Webcite at http://www.webcitation.org/6c7omN8wG)