Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2016 Jul;42(4):896-906.
doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbv224. Epub 2016 Jan 31.

Cost-Effectiveness of Comprehensive, Integrated Care for First Episode Psychosis in the NIMH RAISE Early Treatment Program

Robert Rosenheck  1 , Douglas Leslie  2 , Kyaw Sint  3 , Haiqun Lin  3 , Delbert G Robinson, Nina R Schooler  4 , Kim T Mueser  5 , David L Penn  6 , Jean Addington  7 , Mary F Brunette  8 , Christoph U Correll, Sue E Estroff  9 , Patricia Marcy  10 , James Robinson  11 , Joanne Severe  12 , Agnes Rupp  12 , Michael Schoenbaum  12 , John M Kane
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Cost-Effectiveness of Comprehensive, Integrated Care for First Episode Psychosis in the NIMH RAISE Early Treatment Program

Robert Rosenheck et al. Schizophr Bull. 2016 Jul.

Abstract

This study compares the cost-effectiveness of Navigate (NAV), a comprehensive, multidisciplinary, team-based treatment approach for first episode psychosis (FEP) and usual Community Care (CC) in a cluster randomization trial. Patients at 34 community treatment clinics were randomly assigned to either NAV (N = 223) or CC (N = 181) for 2 years. Effectiveness was measured as a one standard deviation change on the Quality of Life Scale (QLS-SD). Incremental cost effectiveness ratios were evaluated with bootstrap distributions. The Net Health Benefits Approach was used to evaluate the probability that the value of NAV benefits exceeded its costs relative to CC from the perspective of the health care system. The NAV group improved significantly more on the QLS and had higher outpatient mental health and antipsychotic medication costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $12 081/QLS-SD, with a .94 probability that NAV was more cost-effective than CC at $40 000/QLS-SD. When converted to monetized Quality Adjusted Life Years, NAV benefits exceeded costs, especially at future generic drug prices.

Keywords: cost-effectiveness; quality adjusted life years; schizophrenia.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Bootstrap analysis of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for Navigate vs Community Care (NAV vs CC): full sample over 2 years.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
Bootstrap analysis of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for Navigate vs Community Care (NAV vs CC): low-DUP Sample over 2 years. DUP = duration of untreated psychosis.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Bootstrap analysis of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for Navigate vs Community Care (NAV vs CC): High-DUP sample over 2 years. DUP = duration of untreated psychosis.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.
Bootstrap analysis of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for Navigate vs Community Care (NAV vs CC): Full sample with generic medication costs over 2 years.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 5.
Cost effectiveness acceptability curve (Navigate vs Community Care [NAV vs CC]).
Fig. 6.
Fig. 6.
Cost effectiveness acceptability curve (Navigate vs Community Care [NAV vs CC]; low duration of untreated psychosis [DUP]).
Fig. 7.
Fig. 7.
Cost effectiveness acceptability curve (Navigate vs Community Care [NAV vs CC]; high duration of untreated psychosis [DUP]).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bird V, Premkumar P, Kendall T, Whittington C, Mitchell J, Kuipers E. Early intervention services, cognitive-behavioural therapy and family intervention in early psychosis: systematic review. Brit J Psychiatry. 2010;197:350–356. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Alvarez-Jimenez M, Parker AG, Hetrick SE, McGorry PD, Gleeson JF. Preventing the second episode: a systematic review and meta-analysis of psychosocial and pharmacological trials in first-episode psychosis. Schizophr Bull. 2011;37:619–630. - PMC - PubMed
    1. McGorry P, Johanessen JO, Lewis S, et al. Early intervention in psychosis: keeping faith with evidence-based health care. Psychol Med. 2010;40:399–404. - PubMed
    1. Petersen L, Jeppesen P, Thorup A, et al. A randomised multicentre trial of integrated versus standard treatment for patients with a first episode of psychotic illness. BMJ. 2005;331:602. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Craig TK, Garety P, Power P, et al. The Lambeth Early Onset (LEO) Team: randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness of specialised care for early psychosis. BMJ. 2004;329:1067. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms