IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0138816.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-Effectiveness of Financial Incentives to Promote Adherence to Depot Antipsychotic Medication: Economic Evaluation of a Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine Henderson
  • Martin Knapp
  • Ksenija Yeeles
  • Stephen Bremner
  • Sandra Eldridge
  • Anthony S David
  • Nicola O’Connell
  • Tom Burns
  • Stefan Priebe

Abstract

Background: Offering a modest financial incentive to people with psychosis can promote adherence to depot antipsychotic medication, but the cost-effectiveness of this approach has not been examined. Methods: Economic evaluation within a pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial. 141 patients under the care of 73 teams (clusters) were randomised to intervention or control; 138 patients with diagnoses of schizophrenia, schizo-affective disorder or bipolar disorder participated. Intervention participants received £15 per depot injection over 12 months, additional to usual acute, mental and community primary health services. The control group received usual health services. Main outcome measures: incremental cost per 20% increase in adherence to depot antipsychotic medication; incremental cost of ‘good’ adherence (defined as taking at least 95% of the prescribed number of depot medications over the intervention period). Findings: Economic and outcome data for baseline and 12-month follow-up were available for 117 participants. The adjusted difference in adherence between groups was 12.2% (73.4% control vs. 85.6% intervention); the adjusted costs difference was £598 (95% CI -£4 533, £5 730). The extra cost per patient to increase adherence to depot medications by 20% was £982 (95% CI -£8 020, £14 000). The extra cost per patient of achieving 'good' adherence was £2 950 (CI -£19 400, £27 800). Probability of cost-effectiveness exceeded 97.5% at willingness-to-pay values of £14 000 for a 20% increase in adherence and £27 800 for good adherence. Interpretation: Offering a modest financial incentive to people with psychosis is cost-effective in promoting adherence to depot antipsychotic medication. Direct healthcare costs (including costs of the financial incentive) are unlikely to be increased by this intervention. Trial Registration: ISRCTN.com 77769281

Suggested Citation

  • Catherine Henderson & Martin Knapp & Ksenija Yeeles & Stephen Bremner & Sandra Eldridge & Anthony S David & Nicola O’Connell & Tom Burns & Stefan Priebe, 2015. "Cost-Effectiveness of Financial Incentives to Promote Adherence to Depot Antipsychotic Medication: Economic Evaluation of a Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-18, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0138816
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138816
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0138816
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0138816&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0138816?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. Drummond, Michael F. & Sculpher, Mark J. & Torrance, George W. & O'Brien, Bernie J. & Stoddart, Greg L., 2005. "Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 3, number 9780198529453.
    2. Emma L Giles & Shannon Robalino & Elaine McColl & Falko F Sniehotta & Jean Adams, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Financial Incentives for Health Behaviour Change: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-16, March.
    3. Manuel Gomes & Edmond S.-W. Ng & Richard Grieve & Richard Nixon & James Carpenter & Simon G. Thompson, 2012. "Developing Appropriate Methods for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Cluster Randomized Trials," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(2), pages 350-361, March.
    4. Edwin Oberjé & Reina Kinderen & Silvia Evers & Cees Woerkum & Marijn Bruin, 2013. "Cost Effectiveness of Medication Adherence-Enhancing Interventions: A Systematic Review of Trial-Based Economic Evaluations," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(12), pages 1155-1168, December.
    5. Glick, Henry A & Doshi, Jalpa A & Sonnad, Seema S & Polsky, Daniel, 2007. "Economic Evaluation in Clinical Trials," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198529972.
    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. Noémi Kreif & Richard Grieve & M. Zia Sadique, 2013. "Statistical Methods For Cost‐Effectiveness Analyses That Use Observational Data: A Critical Appraisal Tool And Review Of Current Practice," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(4), pages 486-500, April.
    2. G. Sagoo & S. Mohammed & G. Barton & G. Norbury & J. Ahn & C. Ogilvie & M. Kroese, 2015. "Cost Effectiveness of Using Array-CGH for Diagnosing Learning Disability," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 421-432, August.
    3. Theresa Tawiah & Kristian Schultz Hansen & Frank Baiden & Jane Bruce & Mathilda Tivura & Rupert Delimini & Seeba Amengo-Etego & Daniel Chandramohan & Seth Owusu-Agyei & Jayne Webster, 2016. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Test-Based versus Presumptive Treatment of Uncomplicated Malaria in Children under Five Years in an Area of High Transmission in Central Ghana," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-18, October.
    4. Ian M. McCarthy, 2015. "Putting the Patient in Patient Reported Outcomes: A Robust Methodology for Health Outcomes Assessment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(12), pages 1588-1603, December.
    5. 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.
    6. Helen Dakin & Sarah Wordsworth, 2013. "Cost‐Minimisation Analysis Versus Cost‐Effectiveness Analysis, Revisited," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(1), pages 22-34, January.
    7. Emelie Heintz & Andreas Gerber-Grote & Salah Ghabri & Francoise F. Hamers & Valentina Prevolnik Rupel & Renata Slabe-Erker & Thomas Davidson, 2016. "Is There a European View on Health Economic Evaluations? Results from a Synopsis of Methodological Guidelines Used in the EUnetHTA Partner Countries," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 59-76, January.
    8. Hildegard Seidl & Matthias Hunger & Reiner Leidl & Christa Meisinger & Rupert Wende & Bernhard Kuch & Rolf Holle, 2015. "Cost-effectiveness of nurse-based case management versus usual care for elderly patients with myocardial infarction: results from the KORINNA study," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(6), pages 671-681, July.
    9. Deidda, Manuela & Geue, Claudia & Kreif, Noemi & Dundas, Ruth & McIntosh, Emma, 2019. "A framework for conducting economic evaluations alongside natural experiments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 353-361.
    10. Emelie Heintz & Andreas Gerber-Grote & Salah Ghabri & Francoise Hamers & Valentina Rupel & Renata Slabe-Erker & Thomas Davidson, 2016. "Is There a European View on Health Economic Evaluations? Results from a Synopsis of Methodological Guidelines Used in the EUnetHTA Partner Countries," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 59-76, January.
    11. McCarthy, Ian M., 2016. "Eliminating composite bias in treatment effects estimates: Applications to quality of life assessment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 47-58.
    12. Dyfrig Hughes & Joanna Charles & Dalia Dawoud & Rhiannon Tudor Edwards & Emily Holmes & Carys Jones & Paul Parham & Catrin Plumpton & Colin Ridyard & Huw Lloyd-Williams & Eifiona Wood & Seow Tien Yeo, 2016. "Conducting Economic Evaluations Alongside Randomised Trials: Current Methodological Issues and Novel Approaches," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(5), pages 447-461, May.
    13. Janneke Grutters & Mark Sculpher & Andrew Briggs & Johan Severens & Math Candel & James Stahl & Dirk Ruysscher & Albert Boer & Bram Ramaekers & Manuela Joore, 2013. "Acknowledging Patient Heterogeneity in Economic Evaluation," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 111-123, February.
    14. Nicola E Stanczyk & Eline S Smit & Daniela N Schulz & Hein de Vries & Catherine Bolman & Jean W M Muris & Silvia M A A Evers, 2014. "An Economic Evaluation of a Video- and Text-Based Computer-Tailored Intervention for Smoking Cessation: A Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Utility Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(10), pages 1-14, October.
    15. Paddy Gillespie & Eamon O’Shea & Andrew Murphy & Susan Smith & Mary Byrne & Molly Byrne & Margaret Cupples, 2012. "Relative cost effectiveness of the SPHERE intervention in selected patient subgroups with existing coronary heart disease," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(4), pages 429-443, August.
    16. Manuel Gomes & Richard Grieve & Richard Nixon & W. J. Edmunds, 2012. "Statistical Methods for Cost-Effectiveness Analyses That Use Data from Cluster Randomized Trials," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(1), pages 209-220, January.
    17. Richard Grieve & Richard Nixon & Simon G. Thompson, 2010. "Bayesian Hierarchical Models for Cost-Effectiveness Analyses that Use Data from Cluster Randomized Trials," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(2), pages 163-175, March.
    18. Sabina Sanghera & Emma Frew & Janesh Gupta & Joe Kai & Tracy Roberts, 2015. "Exploring the Use of Cost-Benefit Analysis to Compare Pharmaceutical Treatments for Menorrhagia," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(9), pages 957-965, September.
    19. Gemma E. Shields & Paul Clarkson & Ash Bullement & Warren Stevens & Mark Wilberforce & Tracey Farragher & Arpana Verma & Linda M. Davies, 2024. "Advances in Addressing Patient Heterogeneity in Economic Evaluation: A Review of the Methods Literature," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 42(7), pages 737-749, July.
    20. Peter Makai & Willemijn Looman & Eddy Adang & René Melis & Elly Stolk & Isabelle Fabbricotti, 2015. "Cost-effectiveness of integrated care in frail elderly using the ICECAP-O and EQ-5D: does choice of instrument matter?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(4), pages 437-450, May.

    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:plo:pone00:0138816. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.