Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Gesundheitsökonomische Evaluation in der psychiatrischen Versorgungsforschung

Methodische Grundlagen und innovative Ansätze

Health economic evaluation in mental health services research

Methodological basics and innovative approaches

  • Gesundheitspolitik
  • Published:
Prävention und Gesundheitsförderung Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Trotz der zunehmenden Bedeutung gesundheitsökonomischer Analysen für die psychiatrische Versorgungsforschung sind insbesondere neuere methodische Ansätze in diesem Bereich in Deutschland bisher nur wenig bekannt.

Methode

Es werden innovative methodische Ansätze der gesundheitsökonomischen Evaluation dargestellt und deren Anwendungsmöglichkeiten im Bereich der psychiatrischen Versorgungsforschung beispielhaft demonstriert.

Ergebnisse

Behandelt werden die Interpretation von Kosteneffektivitätsrelationen mit Hilfe der Kosteneffektivitätsfläche, die Varianzschätzung für inkrementelle Kosteneffektivitätsrelationen mit der Bootstrapping-Methode und die Interpretation der Kosteneffektivitätsakzeptanzkurve. Als Alternative zur inkrementellen Kosteneffektivitätsanalyse wird der Nettonutzenansatz vorgestellt.

Schlussfolgerungen

Mit dem Nettonutzenansatz werden die Anwendungsmöglichkeiten gesundheitsökonomischer Analysen in der psychiatrischen Versorgungsforschung bedeutend erweitert.

Abstract

Background

Despite the growing importance of health economic analysis in mental health services research recent methodological developments in this field are widely disregarded in Germany.

Methods

Innovative approaches of cost-effectiveness analysis will be presented and its application in mental health service research will be demonstrated.

Results

The interpretation of cost-effectiveness ratios on the background of the cost-effectiveness plane, the problem of variance estimation for the ICER, the application of bootstrapping methods for the assessment of confidence limits and the interpretation of the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve will be demonstrated. As an alternative method to the use of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios the net benefit approach will be presented.

Conclusions

The advantageous characteristics of the net benefit approach increase the applicability of health economic analysis in mental health service research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5
Abb. 6

Literatur

  1. Briggs A, Fenn P (1998) Confidence intervals or surfaces? Uncertainty on the cost-effectiveness plane. Health Econ 7: 723–740

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Briggs AH, O’Brien B (2001) The death of cost-minimization analysis? Health Econ 10: 179–184

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Briggs A (1999) Economics notes: handling uncertainty in economic evaluation. Br Med J 319: 120

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Chisholm D (2003) Cost-effective strategies for reducing the global burden of mentall ill-helth: a generalised approach. Mental Health Res Rev 9: 27–29

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chisholm D (2005) Choosing cost-effective interventions in psychiatry: results from the CHOICE programme of the World Health Organization. World Psychiatry 4: 37–44

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chisholm D (2005) Keeping pace with assessing cost-effectiveness: economic efficiency and priority-setting in mental health. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 39: 645–647

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chisholm D, Healey A, Knapp M (1997) QALYs and mental health care. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 32: 68–75

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Chisholm D, van OM, yuso-Mateos JL, Saxena S (2005) Cost-effectiveness of clinical interventions for reducing the global burden of bipolar disorder. Br J Psychiatry 187: 559–567

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. D’Agostino RB (1998) Tutorial in biostatistics. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med 17: 2265–2281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dolan P (2001) Utilitarianism and the measurement and aggregation of quality – adjusted life years. Health Care Anal 9: 65–76

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Garber AM, Weinstein MC, Torrance GW, Kamlet MS (2005) Theoretical foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis. In: Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB, Weinstein MC (eds) Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford University Press, New York Oxford, pp 25–53

  12. Gold MR, Patrick DL, Torrance GW et al. (1996) Identifying and valuing outcomes. In: Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB, Weinstein MC (eds) Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford University Press, New York Oxford

  13. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB, Weinstein MC (1996) Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York Oxford: Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hargreaves WA, Shumway M, Hu TW, Cuffel B (1998) Cost-outcome methods for mental health. Academic Press, San Diego London New York

  15. Healey A, Chisholm D (1999) Willingness to pay as a measure of the benefits of mental health care. J Ment Health Policy Econ 2: 55–58

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hoch JS, Briggs AH, Willan R (2002) Something old, something new, something borrowed, something blue: a framework for the marriage of health econometrics and cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ 11: 415–430

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hoch JS, Rockx MA, Krahn AD (2006) Using the net benefit regression framework to construct cost-effectiveness acceptability curves: an example using data from a trial of external loop recorders versus Holter monitoring for ambulatory monitoring of „community acquired“ syncope. BMC Health Serv Res 6: 68

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hoch JS, Smith MW (2006) A guide to economic evaluation: methods for cost-effectiveness analysis of person-level data. J Trauma Stress 19: 787–797

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kilian R (2007) Die Anwendung der Kosteneffektivitätsanalyse in der psychiatrischen Versorgungsforschung. Methodische Probleme und Lösungsansätze (The application of cost-effectiveness analysis in mental health services research. Methodological prolbems and solutions. Psychiat Prax 34(1): 138–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kilian R, Angermeyer MC (2005) The effects of antipsychotic treatment on quality of life of schizophrenic patients under naturalistic treatment conditions: An application of random effect regression models and propensity scores in an observational prospective trial. Qual Life Res 14: 1275–1289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kilian R, Becker T (2006) Aktuelle Entwicklungstendenzen psychiatrischer Versorgungsforschung. In: Pawils S, Koch U (Hrsg) Psychosoziale Versorgung in der Medizin. Schattauer, Stuttgart, S 331–342

  22. Kilian R, Becker T (2007) Versorgungsforschung und medizinischer Fortschritt. Etablierung einer Brückendisziplin in der Psychiatrie. Neurotransmitter 18: 37–38

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kilian R, Knenelly B, McDaid D, Becker T (2007) Gesundheitsökonomische Aspekte der Suizidprävention. Health economic aspects of suicide prevention. Suizidprophylaxe 34: 220–236

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kilian R, Roick C, Angermeyer MC (2004) Methodische Probleme und Lösungsansätze der Kostenerfassung und der Kostenanalyse in der psychiatrischen Versorgung am Beispiel der Schizophreniebehandlung. In: Vogel H, Wasem J (Hrsg) Gesundheitsökonomie in Psychotherapie und Psychiatrie. Gesundheitsökonomische Untersuchungen in der psychotherapeutischen und psychiatrischen Versorgung. Schattauer, Stuttgart New York, S 76–99

  25. Kilian R, Angermeyer MC (2004) The impact of antipsychotic medication on the incidence and the costs of inpatient treatment in people with schizophrenia: results from a prospective observational study. Psychiatr Prax 31: 138–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kilian R, Angermeyer MC (2005) The effects of antipsychotic treatment on quality of life of schizophrenic patients under naturalistic treatment conditions: an application of random effect regression models and propensity scores in an observational prospective trial. Qual Life Res 14: 1275–1289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kilian R, Angermeyer MC, Becker T (2004) Methodolocical issues of naturalistic observational studies on the economic evaluation of neuroleptic treatment for schizophrenic disease. Gesundheitswesen 66: 180–185

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Kilian R, Dietrich S, Toumi M, Angermeyer MC (2004) Quality of life in persons with schizophrenia in out-patient treatment with first- or second-generation antipsychotics. Acta Psychiatr Scand 110: 108–118

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kilian R, Roick C, Angermeyer MC (2003) The impact of the study design and the sampling procedure on the assessment of mental health services. Nervenarzt 74: 561–570

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Laha RG (1958) An example of a nonnormal distribution where the quotient follows the cauchy law. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 44: 222–223

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Lopez AD, Mathers CD, Ezzati M et al. (2006) Global and regional burden of disease and risk factors 2001: systematic analysis of population health data. Lancet 367: 1747–1757

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. March JS, Silva SG, Compton S et al. (2005) The case for practical clinical trials in psychiatry. Am J Psychiatr 162: 836–846

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mason J, Drummond M, Torrance G (1993) Some guidelines on the use of cost effectiveness league tables. Br Med J 306: 570–572

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Mont D (2007) Measuring health and disability. Lancet 369: 1658–1663

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Muening P (2002) Desinging and conducting cost-effectiveness analyses in medicine and health care. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco

  36. Mulvaney-Day NE (2005) Using willingness to pay to measure family members‘ preferences in mental health. J Ment Health Policy Econ 8: 71–81

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Polsky D, Glick HA, Willke R, Schulman K (1997) Confidence intervals for cost-effectiveness ratios: A comparison of four methods. Health Econ 6: 243–252

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Reidpath DD, Allotey PA, Kouame A, Cummins RA (2003) Measuring health in a vacuum: examining the disability weight of the DALY. Health Policy Plan 18: 351–356

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Revicki DA (1995) Measuring health outcomes for cost-effectiveness studies: are all quality adjusted life years created equal? Drug Inf J 29: 1459–1467

    Google Scholar 

  40. Russel LB, Siegel JE, Daniels N et al. (1996) Cost-effectiveness analysis as a guide to resource allocation in health: roles and limitations. In: Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB, Weinstein MC (eds) Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford University Press, New York Oxford, pp 3–24

  41. Schöffski O, Glaser P, Graf von der Schulenburg M (1998) Gesundheitsökonomische Evaluationen. Grundlagen und Standortbestimmungen. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

  42. Schrappe M, Glaeske G, Gottwik M et al. (2005) Konzeptionelle, methodische und strukturelle Voraussetzungen der Versorgungsforschung. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 130: 2918–2922

    Google Scholar 

  43. Sendi PP, Briggs AH (2001) Affordability and cost-effectiveness: Decision making on the cost-effectiveness plane. Health Econ 10: 675–680

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Stant AD, Buskens E, Jenner JA et al. (2007) Cost-effectiveness analysis in severe mental illness: outcome measures selection. J Ment Health Policy Econ 10: 101–108

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Ustun TB, Chisholm D (2001) Global „burden of disease“-study for psychiatric disorders. Psychiatr Prax 28(Suppl 1): 7–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Viscusi WK (2003) The value of life: Estimates with risks by occupation and industry. Disussion Paper No 422 Cambridge: HAVARD John M Olin Center for Law, Economics and Business, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  47. Willan AR, Briggs AH, Hoch JS (2004) Regression methods for covariate adjustment and subgroup analysis for non-censored cost-effectiveness data. Health Econ 13: 461–475

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. World Health Organization (2001) Atlas Mental health resources in the world 2001. World Health Organization, Geneva

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universität Ulm, Klinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie II am Bezirkskrankenhaus Günzburg, Ludwig-Heilmeyer-Straße 2, 89312, Günzburg, Deutschland

    R. Kilian rer. soc.

Authors
  1. R. Kilian rer. soc.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Kilian rer. soc..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kilian, R. Gesundheitsökonomische Evaluation in der psychiatrischen Versorgungsforschung. Präv Gesundheitsf 3, 135–144 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11553-008-0120-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11553-008-0120-6

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation