Impact on costs of a case management intervention for emergency department frequent users

Background: In most of the emergency departments (ED) in developed countries, a subset of patients visits the ED frequently. Despite their small numbers, these patients are the source of a disproportionally high number of all ED visits, and use a significant proportion of healthcare resources. They place a heavy economic burden on hospital and healthcare system budgets overall. In order to improve the management of these patients, the University hospital of Lausanne, Switzerland implemented a case management intervention (CM) between May 2012 and July 2013. In this randomized controlled trial, 250 frequent ED users (visits>5 during previous 12 months) were allocated to either the CM group or the standard ED care (SC) group and followed up for 12 months. The first result of the CM was to reduce significantly the ED visits. The present study examined whether the CM intervention also reduced the costs generated by the ED frequent users not only from the hospital perspective, but also from the healthcare system perspective. Methods: Cost data were obtained from the hospital's analytical accounting system and from health insurances. Multivariate linear models including a fixed effect "group" and socio-demographic characteristics and health-related variables were run.

Efficacy of brief interdisciplinary psychotherapeutic intervention for motor conversion disorder and nonepileptic attacks.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare a brief interdisciplinary psychotherapeutic intervention to standard care as treatments for patients recently diagnosed with severe motor conversion disorder or nonepileptic attacks. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial of 23 consecutive patients compared (a) an interdisciplinary psychotherapeutic intervention group receiving four to six sessions by a consultation liaison psychiatrist, the first and last sessions adding a neurological consultation and a joint psychiatric and neurological consultation, and (b) a standard care group. After intervention, patients were assessed at 2, 6 and 12 months with the Somatoform Dissociation Questionnaire (SDQ-20), Clinical Global Impression scale, Rankin scale, use of medical care, global mental health [Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, mental health component of Short Form (SF)-36] and quality of life (SF-36). We calculated linear mixed models. RESULTS: Our intervention brought a statistically significant improvement of physical symptoms [as measured by the SDQ-20 (P<.02) and the Clinical Global Impression scale (P=.02)] and psychological symptoms [better scores on the mental health component of the SF-36 (P<.05) and on the Beck Depression Inventory (P<.05)] and a reduction in new hospital stays after intervention (P<.05). CONCLUSION: A brief psychotherapeutic intervention taking advantage of a close collaboration with neurology consultants in the setting of consultation liaison psychiatry appears effective.

Cost-effectiveness of a community pharmacist intervention in patients with depression: a randomized controlled trial (PRODEFAR study)

Background: Non-adherence to antidepressants generates higher costs for the treatment of depression. Little is known about the cost-effectiveness of pharmacist's interventions aimed at improving adherence to antidepressants. The study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a community pharmacist intervention in comparison with usual care in depressed patients initiating treatment with antidepressants in primary care. Methods: Patients were recruited by general practitioners and randomized to community pharmacist intervention (87) that received an educational intervention and usual care (92). Adherence to antidepressants, clinical symptoms, Quality-Adjusted Life-Years (QALYs), use of healthcare services and productivity losses were measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months. Results: There were no significant differences between groups in costs or effects. From a societal perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the community pharmacist intervention compared with usual care was 1,866 for extra adherent patient and 9,872 per extra QALY. In terms of remission of depressive symptoms, the usual care dominated the community pharmacist intervention. If willingness to pay (WTP) is 30,000 per extra adherent patient, remission of symptoms or QALYs, the probability of the community pharmacist intervention being cost-effective was 0.71, 0.46 and 0.75, respectively (societal perspective). From a healthcare perspective, the probability of the community pharmacist intervention being cost-effective in terms of adherence, QALYs and remission was of 0.71, 0.76 and 0.46, respectively, if WTP is 30,000. Conclusion: A brief community pharmacist intervention addressed to depressed patients initiating antidepressant treatment showed a probability of being cost-effective of 0.71 and 0.75 in terms of improvement of adherence and QALYs, respectively, when compared to usual care. Regular implementation of the community pharmacist intervention is not recommended.