IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharmo/v5y2021i3d10.1007_s41669-021-00267-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-effectiveness of a Province-wide Quality Improvement Initiative for Reducing Potentially Inappropriate Use of Antipsychotics in Long-Term Care in British Columbia, Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Asif Raza Khowaja

    (Department of Health Sciences at Brock University)

  • Christina Krause

    (Faculty of Medicine at the University of British Columbia)

  • Colleen Kennedy

    (BC Patient Safety & Quality Council)

  • Ben Ridout

    (BC Patient Safety & Quality Council)

  • Sarah Carriere

    (BC Patient Safety & Quality Council)

  • Craig Mitton

    (School of Population and Public Health; and Senior Scientist at the Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation)

Abstract

Background Potentially inappropriate use of antipsychotics (PIUA) raises serious concerns about safety, quality, and cost of care for residents in long-term care (LTC). Objective This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the Call for Less Antipsychotics in Long-Term Care (Clear) initiative compared with the status quo (pre-Clear, baseline). Methods A model-based cost-utility analysis, from a public-payer perspective in British Columbia, was conducted using secondary data of residents in LTC homes from 2013 to 2019. Residents’ health resource utilization and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) measures were extracted from multiple administrative databases. Six Markov states were modelled for post-antipsychotic progression representing PIUA, appropriate use of antipsychotic, complete withdrawal, and death. The primary outcome was the incremental cost per QALY gained. Results A cohort of 35,669 residents was included in the primary analysis. The Clear initiative, over 10 years, was estimated to have an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CA$26,055 (2020 Canadian dollars) per QALY gained at an incremental cost of CA$5211 per resident and a QALY gain of 0.20. In the subgroup analyses, our findings were even more favourable for Clear wave 2 (ICER of CA$24,447 per QALY gained) and Clear wave 3 (ICER of CA$25,933 per QALY gained). At a willingness-to-pay of CA$50,000 per QALY gained, the probabilities of Clear waves 2 and 3 were 82% cost-effective. Conclusion This study demonstrated incremental costs and yielded favourable ICERs for Clear compared with the baseline. More research is needed to understand the level of support for individual care homes to sustain the Clear initiative in the long run.

Suggested Citation

  • Asif Raza Khowaja & Christina Krause & Colleen Kennedy & Ben Ridout & Sarah Carriere & Craig Mitton, 2021. "Cost-effectiveness of a Province-wide Quality Improvement Initiative for Reducing Potentially Inappropriate Use of Antipsychotics in Long-Term Care in British Columbia, Canada," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 491-504, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:5:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s41669-021-00267-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s41669-021-00267-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41669-021-00267-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41669-021-00267-6?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dolan, Paul, 2000. "The measurement of health-related quality of life for use in resource allocation decisions in health care," Handbook of Health Economics, in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 32, pages 1723-1760, Elsevier.
    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. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F., 2012. "A test of independence of discounting from quality of life," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 22-34.
    2. David Mayston, "undated". "Developing a Framework Theory for Assessing the Benefits of Careers Guidance," Discussion Papers 02/08, Department of Economics, University of York.
    3. Christopher McCabe & Katherine Stevens & Jennifer Roberts & John Brazier, 2005. "Health state values for the HUI 2 descriptive system: results from a UK survey," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 231-244, March.
    4. Howley, Peter, 2017. "Less money or better health? Evaluating individual’s willingness to make trade-offs using life satisfaction data," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 53-65.
    5. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F., 2009. "The correction of TTO-scores for utility curvature using a risk-free utility elicitation method," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 234-243, January.
    6. Aris Angelis & Panos Kanavos, 2016. "Value-Based Assessment of New Medical Technologies: Towards a Robust Methodological Framework for the Application of Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis in the Context of Health Technology Assessment," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(5), pages 435-446, May.
    7. Paul Dolan & Daniel Kahneman, 2008. "Interpretations Of Utility And Their Implications For The Valuation Of Health," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 215-234, January.
    8. Hansen, Lise Desireé & Kjær, Trine, 2019. "Disentangling public preferences for health gains at end-of-life: Further evidence of no support of an end-of-life premium," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 1-1.
    9. van der Pol, Marjon & Ruggeri, Matteo, 2008. "Is risk attitude outcome specific within the health domain?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 706-717, May.
    10. Schünemann, Johannes & Strulik, Holger & Trimborn, Timo, 2017. "Going from bad to worse: Adaptation to poor health health spending, longevity, and the value of life," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 130-146.
    11. James K. Hammitt, 2002. "QALYs Versus WTP," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(5), pages 985-1001, October.
    12. Arthur E. Attema & Han Bleichrodt & Olivier l’Haridon & Stefan A. Lipman, 2020. "A comparison of individual and collective decision making for standard gamble and time trade-off," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(3), pages 465-473, April.
    13. Liqun Liu & Andrew J. Rettenmaier & Thomas R. Saving, 2012. "Endogenous Patient Responses and the Consistency Principle in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(3), pages 488-497, May.
    14. Don Kenkel, 2006. "WTP- and QALY-Based Approaches to Valuing Health for Policy: Common Ground and Disputed Territory," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 34(3), pages 419-437, July.
    15. Carmen Herrero & Juan Moreno-Ternero, 2008. "Opportunity analysis of newborn screening programs," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 12(4), pages 259-277, December.
    16. Paul Dolan & Jan Abel Olsen & Paul Menzel & Jeff Richardson, 2003. "An inquiry into the different perspectives that can be used when eliciting preferences in health," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(7), pages 545-551, July.
    17. Dolan, Paul & Stalmeier, Peep, 2003. "The validity of time trade-off values in calculating QALYs: constant proportional time trade-off versus the proportional heuristic," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 445-458, May.
    18. Arthur Attema & Werner Brouwer, 2012. "The way that you do it? An elaborate test of procedural invariance of TTO, using a choice-based design," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(4), pages 491-500, August.
    19. Chen Li & Zhihua Li & Peter Wakker, 2014. "If nudge cannot be applied: a litmus test of the readers’ stance on paternalism," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(3), pages 297-315, March.
    20. Wim Groot & Henriëtte Maassen van den Brink & Erik Plug, 2004. "Money for health: the equivalent variation of cardiovascular diseases," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(9), pages 859-872, September.

    More about this item

    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:pharmo:v:5:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s41669-021-00267-6. 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.