IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v23y2022i2d10.1007_s10198-021-01360-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic evaluation of a complex intervention (Engager) for prisoners with common mental health problems, near to and after release: a cost-utility and cost-consequences analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Rachael Maree Hunter

    (University College London (UCL))

  • Rob Anderson

    (University of Exeter)

  • Tim Kirkpatrick

    (University of Manchester)

  • Charlotte Lennox

    (University of Manchester)

  • Fiona Warren

    (University of Exeter)

  • Rod S. Taylor

    (University of Exeter
    University of Glasgow)

  • Jenny Shaw

    (University of Manchester)

  • Mark Haddad

    (City, University of London)

  • Alex Stirzaker

    (NHS England, South West Mental Health Clinical Network)

  • Mike Maguire

    (University of South Wales)

  • Richard Byng

    (University of Plymouth)

Abstract

Background People in prison experience a range of physical and mental health problems. Evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of prison-based interventions presents a number of methodological challenges. We present a case study of an economic evaluation of a prison-based intervention (“Engager”) to address common mental health problems. Methods Two hundred and eighty people were recruited from prisons in England and randomised to Engager plus usual care or usual care. Participants were followed up for 12 months following release from prison. The primary analysis is the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of Engager compared to usual care from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective with QALYs calculated using the CORE 6 Dimension. A cost-consequences analysis evaluated cross-sectoral costs and a range of outcomes. Results From an NHS perspective, Engager cost an additional £2737 per participant (95% of iterations between £1029 and £4718) with a mean QALY difference of − 0.014 (95% of iterations between − 0.045 and 0.017). For the cost-consequences, there was evidence of improved access to substance misuse services 12 months post-release (odds ratio 2.244, 95% confidence Interval 1.304–3.861). Conclusion Engager provides a rare example of a cost-utility analysis conducted in prisons and the community using patient-completed measures. Although the results from this trial show no evidence that Engager is cost-effective, the results of the cost-consequences analysis suggest that follow-up beyond 12 months post-release using routine data may provide additional insights into the effectiveness of the intervention and the importance of including a wide range of costs and outcomes in prison-based economic evaluations. Trial registration (ISRCTN11707331).

Suggested Citation

  • Rachael Maree Hunter & Rob Anderson & Tim Kirkpatrick & Charlotte Lennox & Fiona Warren & Rod S. Taylor & Jenny Shaw & Mark Haddad & Alex Stirzaker & Mike Maguire & Richard Byng, 2022. "Economic evaluation of a complex intervention (Engager) for prisoners with common mental health problems, near to and after release: a cost-utility and cost-consequences analysis," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(2), pages 193-210, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:23:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s10198-021-01360-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-021-01360-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-021-01360-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-021-01360-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew H. Briggs & David E. Wonderling & Christopher Z. Mooney, 1997. "Pulling cost‐effectiveness analysis up by its bootstraps: A non‐parametric approach to confidence interval estimation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(4), pages 327-340, July.
    2. Drummond, Michael F. & Sculpher, Mark J. & Claxton, Karl & Stoddart, Greg L. & Torrance, George W., 2015. "Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 4, number 9780199665884.
    3. Rachael Hunter & Gianluca Baio & Thomas Butt & Stephen Morris & Jeff Round & Nick Freemantle, 2015. "An Educational Review of the Statistical Issues in Analysing Utility Data for Cost-Utility Analysis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 355-366, April.
    4. Elisabeth Fenwick & Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher, 2001. "Representing uncertainty: the role of cost‐effectiveness acceptability curves," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(8), pages 779-787, December.
    5. Terry N. Flynn & Elisabeth Huynh & Tim J. Peters & Hareth Al‐Janabi & Sam Clemens & Alison Moody & Joanna Coast, 2015. "Scoring the Icecap‐a Capability Instrument. Estimation of a UK General Population Tariff," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(3), pages 258-269, March.
    6. Baptiste Leurent & Manuel Gomes & James Carpenter, 2018. "Comment on: Sensitivity Analysis for Not-at-Random Missing Data in Trial-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: A Tutorial," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(10), pages 1297-1297, October.
    7. Nancy J. Devlin & Koonal K. Shah & Yan Feng & Brendan Mulhern & Ben van Hout, 2018. "Valuing health‐related quality of life: An EQ‐5D‐5L value set for England," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 7-22, January.
    8. Baptiste Leurent & Manuel Gomes & Rita Faria & Stephen Morris & Richard Grieve & James R. Carpenter, 2018. "Sensitivity Analysis for Not-at-Random Missing Data in Trial-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: A Tutorial," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(8), pages 889-901, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mohsen Sadatsafavi; & Carlo Marra; & Lawrence McCandless & Stirling Bryan, 2012. "The challenge of incorporating external evidence in trial-based cost-effectiveness analyses: the use of resampling methods," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 12/24, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    2. Andrija S Grustam & Nasuh Buyukkaramikli & Ron Koymans & Hubertus J M Vrijhoef & Johan L Severens, 2019. "Value of information analysis in telehealth for chronic heart failure management," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-23, June.
    3. Yates, Brian T., 2021. "Toward collaborative cost-inclusive evaluation: Adaptations and transformations for evaluators and economists," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    4. Manca, A & Austin, P. C, 2008. "Using propensity score methods to analyse individual patient-level cost-effectiveness data from observational studies," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 08/20, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    5. Lien Nguyen & Hanna Jokimäki & Ismo Linnosmaa & Eirini-Christina Saloniki & Laurie Batchelder & Juliette Malley & Hui Lu & Peter Burge & Birgit Trukeschitz & Julien Forder, 2022. "Valuing informal carers’ quality of life using best-worst scaling—Finnish preference weights for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for carers (ASCOT-Carer)," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(3), pages 357-374, April.
    6. Kobelt, G., 2013. "Health Economics: An Introduction to Economic Evaluation," Monographs, Office of Health Economics, number 000004.
    7. Lemoine, Coralie & Loubière, Sandrine & Boucekine, Mohamed & Girard, Vincent & Tinland, Aurélie & Auquier, Pascal, 2021. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of housing first intervention with an independent housing and team support for homeless people with severe mental illness: A Markov model informed by a randomized controlle," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    8. Mohamed El Alili & Johanna M. van Dongen & Jonas L. Esser & Martijn W. Heymans & Maurits W. van Tulder & Judith E. Bosmans, 2022. "A scoping review of statistical methods for trial‐based economic evaluations: The current state of play," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(12), pages 2680-2699, December.
    9. Spencer, Anne & Rivero-Arias, Oliver & Wong, Ruth & Tsuchiya, Aki & Bleichrodt, Han & Edwards, Rhiannon Tudor & Norman, Richard & Lloyd, Andrew & Clarke, Philip, 2022. "The QALY at 50: One story many voices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 296(C).
    10. Ernest H. Law & A. Simon Pickard & Feng Xie & Surrey M. Walton & Todd A. Lee & Alan Schwartz, 2018. "Parallel Valuation: A Direct Comparison of EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L Societal Value Sets," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(8), pages 968-982, November.
    11. Bas Groot Koerkamp & Milton C. Weinstein & Theo Stijnen & M.H. Heijenbrok-Kal & M.G. Myriam Hunink, 2010. "Uncertainty and Patient Heterogeneity in Medical Decision Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(2), pages 194-205, March.
    12. Cochrane, M. & Watson, P.M. & Timpson, H. & Haycox, A. & Collins, B. & Jones, L. & Martin, A. & Graves, L.E.F., 2019. "Systematic review of the methods used in economic evaluations of targeted physical activity and sedentary behaviour interventions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 156-167.
    13. Himmler, Sebastian & Jonker, Marcel & van Krugten, Frédérique & Hackert, Mariska & van Exel, Job & Brouwer, Werner, 2022. "Estimating an anchored utility tariff for the well-being of older people measure (WOOP) for the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).
    14. Lidia Engel & Duncan Mortimer & Stirling Bryan & Scott A. Lear & David G. T. Whitehurst, 2017. "An Investigation of the Overlap Between the ICECAP-A and Five Preference-Based Health-Related Quality of Life Instruments," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(7), pages 741-753, July.
    15. Mark Sculpher & Stephen Palmer, 2020. "After 20 Years of Using Economic Evaluation, Should NICE be Considered a Methods Innovator?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 247-257, March.
    16. Torbjørn Wisløff & Richard White & Olav Dalgard & Ellen J. Amundsen & Hinta Meijerink & Astrid Louise Løvlie & Hilde Kløvstad, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Direct-Acting Antivirals for Hepatitis C in Norway," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(5), pages 591-601, May.
    17. Alexina J. Mason & Manuel Gomes & Richard Grieve & James R. Carpenter, 2018. "A Bayesian framework for health economic evaluation in studies with missing data," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(11), pages 1670-1683, November.
    18. Paul Mark Mitchell & Samantha Husbands & Sarah Byford & Philip Kinghorn & Cara Bailey & Tim J. Peters & Joanna Coast, 2021. "Challenges in developing capability measures for children and young people for use in the economic evaluation of health and care interventions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(9), pages 1990-2003, September.
    19. Irina Pokhilenko & Luca M. M. Janssen & Aggie T. G. Paulus & Ruben M. W. A. Drost & William Hollingworth & Joanna C. Thorn & Sian Noble & Judit Simon & Claudia Fischer & Susanne Mayer & Luis Salvador-, 2023. "Development of an Instrument for the Assessment of Health-Related Multi-sectoral Resource Use in Europe: The PECUNIA RUM," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 155-166, March.
    20. Chiranjeev Sanyal & Don Husereau, 2020. "Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of Services Provided by Community Pharmacists," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 375-392, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cost-utility; Cost-consequences; Prison; Common mental health problems; Mentalisation therapy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:23:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s10198-021-01360-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.