Modelling the population cost-effectiveness of current and evidence-based optimal treatment for anxiety disorders

Background. The present paper describes a component of a large Population cost-effectiveness study that aimed to identify the averted burden and economic efficiency of current and optimal treatment for the major mental disorders. This paper reports on the findings for the anxiety disorders (panic disorder/agoraphobia, social phobia, generalized anxiety disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder). Method. Outcome was calculated as averted 'years lived with disability' (YLD), a population summary measure of disability burden. Costs were the direct health care costs in 1997-8 Australian dollars. The cost per YLD averted (efficiency) was calculated for those already in contact with the health system for a mental health problem (current care) and for a hypothetical optimal care package of evidence-based treatment for this same group. Data sources included the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Well-being and published treatment effects and unit costs. Results. Current coverage was around 40% for most disorders with the exception of social phobia at 21%. Receipt of interventions consistent with evidence-based care ranged from 32% of those in contact with services for social phobia to 64% for post-traumatic stress disorder. The cost of this care was estimated at $400 million, resulting in a cost per YLD averted ranging from $7761 for generalized anxiety disorder to $34 389 for panic/agoraphobia. Under optimal care, costs remained similar but health gains were increased substantially, reducing the cost per YLD to < $20 000 for all disorders. Conclusions. Evidence-based care for anxiety disorders would produce greater population health gain at a similar cost to that of current care, resulting in a substantial increase in the cost-effectiveness of treatment.

Occupational therapy and evidence-based practice in mental health

Evidence-based practice (EBP) represents a paradigm shift in health care. This review has two aims. The first is to consider the merits of EBP,especially in respect of its use in mental health settings. The second is both to identify psychosocial interventions that have an established evidence base for effectiveness and to provide an analysis of the quality of this evidence and its implications for occupational therapy. Supported employment, family psychoeducation, assertive case management and integrated substance use treatment are examined in detail. It is proposed that occupational therapists working in mental health give priority to psychosocial interventions that are based on evidence and incorporate these into their practice. It is further proposed that, in implementing EBP,practitioners take an active evaluating position in relation to published evidence, paying particular attention to the evidence of effectiveness in equivalent clinical environments.

Evidence-based practice and rehabilitation: occupational therapy in Australia and New Zealand experiences

Evidence-based practice has become the dominant paradigm in the delivery of rehabilitation programme. However, occupational therapists in Australia and New Zealand have been slow in making the transition to become evidence-based practitioners. Collaboration between the university/ tertiary institute and clinical setting is one way that clinicians can be assisted with incorporating research into their practice. Two case examples are presented outlining how collaborative practice can result in improved out.. comes for all concerned.

Australian occupational therapists' use of an online evidence-based practice database (OTseeker)

Introduction: Online databases can support the implementation of evidence-based practice by providing easy access to research. OTseeker (www.otseeker.com), an electronic evidence database, was introduced in 2003 to assist occupational therapists to locate and interpret research. Objectives: This study explored Australian occupational therapists' use and perceptions of OTseeker and its impact on their knowledge and practice. Methods: A postal survey questionnaire was distributed to two samples: (i) a proportionate random sample of 400 occupational therapists from all states and territories of Australia, and (ii) a random sample of occupational therapists working in 95 facilities in two Australian states (Queensland and New South Wales). Results: The questionnaire was completed by 213 participants. While most participants (85.9%) had heard of OTseeker, only 103 (56.6%) had accessed it, with lack of time being the main reason for non-use. Of the 103 participants who had accessed OTseeker, 68.9% had done so infrequently, 63.1% agreed that it had increased their knowledge and 13.6% had changed their practice after accessing information on OTseeker. Conclusion: Despite OTseeker being developed to provide occupational therapists with easy access to research, lack of time was the main reason why over half of the participants in this study had not accessed it. This exploratory research suggests, however, that there is potential for the database to influence occupational therapists' knowledge and practice about treatment efficacy through access to the research literature.

Self-determination theory: A case study of evidence-based coaching

The coach is central to the development of expertise in sport (Bloom, 1985) and is subsequently key to facilitating adaptive forms of motivation to enhance the quality of sport performance (Mallett & Hanrahan, 2004). In designing optimal training environments that are sensitive to the underlying motives of athletes, the coach requires an in-depth understanding of motivation. This paper reports on the application of self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2000) to coaching elite athletes. Specifically, the application of SDT to designing an autonomy-supportive motivational climate is outlined, which was used in preparing Australia's two men's relay teams for the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens.

Evidence-based medicine is affordable: The cost-effectiveness of current compared with optimal treatment in rheumatoid and osteoarthritis

Objective. To determine the cost-effectiveness of averting the burden of disease. We used secondary population data and metaanalyses of various government-funded services and interventions to investigate the costs and benefits of various levels of treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarthritis (OA) in adults using a burden of disease framework. Method. Population burden was calculated for both diseases in the absence of any treatment as years lived with disability (YLD), ignoring the years of life lost. We then estimated the proportion of burden averted with current interventions, the proportion that could be averted with optimally implemented cut-rent evidence-based guidelines, and the direct treatment cost-effectiveness ratio in dollars per YLD averted for both treatment levels. Results. The majority of people with arthritis sought medical treatment. Current treatment for RA averted 26% of the burden, with a cost-effectiveness ratio of $19,000 per YLD averted. Optimal, evidence-based treatment would avert 48% of the burden. with a cost-effectiveness ratio of $12,000 per YLD averted. Current treatment of OA in Australia averted 27% of the burden, with a cost-effectiveness ratio of $25,000 per YLD averted. Optimal, evidence-based treatment would avert 39% of the burden, with an unchanged cost-effectiveness ratio of $25,000 per YLD averted. Conclusion. While the precise dollar costs in each country will differ, the relativities at this level of coverage should remain the same. There is no evidence that closing the gap between evidence and practice would result in a drop in efficiency.