You are not logged in.

Cost-effectiveness of four parenting programs and bibliotherapy for parents of children with conduct problems

Sampaio, Filipa, Enebrink, Pia, Mihalopoulos, Cathrine and Feldman, Inna 2016, Cost-effectiveness of four parenting programs and bibliotherapy for parents of children with conduct problems, Journal of mental health policy and economics, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 201-212.


Title Cost-effectiveness of four parenting programs and bibliotherapy for parents of children with conduct problems
Author(s) Sampaio, Filipa
Enebrink, Pia
Mihalopoulos, Cathrine
Feldman, Inna
Journal name Journal of mental health policy and economics
Volume number 19
Issue number 4
Start page 201
End page 212
Total pages 12
Publisher International Center of Mental Health Policy and Economics
Place of publication Milano, Italy
Publication date 2016-12-01
ISSN 1091-4358
Keyword(s) Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Health Policy & Services
Psychiatry
Health Care Sciences & Services
Summary BACKGROUND: Parenting programs and self-help parenting interventions employing written materials are effective in reducing child conduct problems (CP) in the short-term compared to control groups, however evidence on the cost-effectiveness of such interventions is insufficient. Few studies have looked at the differences in effects between interventions in the same study design. AIM: This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of four parenting programs: Comet, Incredible Years (IY), Cope and Connect, and bibliotherapy, compared to a waitlist control (WC), with a time horizon of 4 months, targeting CP in children aged 3-12 years. METHODS: This economic evaluation was conducted alongside an RCT of the four parenting interventions and bibliotherapy compared to a WC. The study sample consisted of 961 parents of 3-12 year-old children with CP. CP was measured by the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory. Effectiveness was expressed as the proportion of "recovered" cases of CP. The time horizon of the study was four months with a limited health sector perspective, including parents' time costs. We performed an initial comparative cost analysis for interventions whose outcomes differed significantly from the WC, and later a cost-effectiveness analysis of interventions whose outcomes differed significantly from both the WC and each other. Secondary analyses were performed: (i) joint outcome "recovered and improved", (ii) intervention completers, (iii) exclusion of parents' time costs, (iv) exclusion of training costs. RESULTS: All interventions apart from Connect significantly reduced CP compared to the WC. Of the other interventions Comet resulted in a significantly higher proportion of recovered cases compared to bibliotherapy. A comparative cost analysis of the effective interventions rendered an average cost per recovered case for bibliotherapy of USD 483, Cope USD 1972, Comet USD 3741, and IY USD 6668. Furthermore, Comet had an ICER of USD 8375 compared to bibliotherapy. Secondary analyses of "recovered and improved" and of intervention completers held Cope as the cheapest alternative. Exclusion of parents' time and training costs did not change the cost-effectiveness results. DISCUSSION: The time horizon for this evaluation is very short. This study also had a limited costing perspective. Results may be interpreted with caution when considering decision-making about value for money. The inclusion of a multi-attribute utility instrument sensitive to domains of quality-of-life impacted by CP in children would be valuable so that pragmatic value for money estimations can be made. IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH: Further studies are needed with longer follow-up periods to ascertain on the sustainability of the effects, and fuller economic evaluations and economic modeling to provide insights on longer-term cost-effectiveness. These results also raise the need to investigate the cost-effectiveness of the provision of these interventions as a "stepped care" approach. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest the delivery of different programs according to budget constraints and the outcome desired. In the absence of a WTP threshold, bibliotherapy could be a cheap and effective option to initially target CP within a limited budget, whereas Comet could be offered to achieve greater effects based on decision-makers' willingness to make larger investments. In its turn, Cope could be offered when targeting broader outcomes, such as symptom improvement, rather than clinical caseness.
Language eng
Field of Research 111714 Mental Health
140208 Health Economics
1117 Public Health And Health Services
1701 Psychology
1402 Applied Economics
Socio Economic Objective 920410 Mental Health
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
ERA Research output type C Journal article
Copyright notice ©2016, ICMPE
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30091361

Document type: Journal Article
Collection: Population Health
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 15 Abstract Views  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Thu, 16 Feb 2017, 15:18:27 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.