Schizophrenia costs and treatment cost-effectiveness
Please note: this is a legacy publication from CPEC (formely PSSRU at LSE).Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 102 Supplement s407 15-18
Available online: 22 October 2003
Abstract
Objective: The paper sets out to summarize evidence on the costs of schizophrenia and on the cost-effectiveness of three broad treatment areas. Method: Evidence from a number of countries was examined, both published and unpublished, and systematic reviews and meta-analyses were consulted. Results: The costs of schizophrenia are high and wide-ranging. They fall not only to health-care agencies but also to other parts of the public sector, to families, to sufferers themselves and to the wider society. However, there are interventions — a counselling intervention to address non-compliance with medication, family interventions to reduce levels of expressed emotion, and atypical antipsychotic drugs — that have been found to be not only effective (improving patient outcomes) but also appear to be cost-effective. Conclusion: Resource constraints and policy pressures make it increasingly common for economic as well as clinical questions to be asked about new modes of treatment. This is the new reality of mental health practice. Reliable evidence is now available to address these economic questions and can be factored into decision-making processes.
Objective: The paper sets out to summarize evidence on the costs of schizophrenia and on the cost-effectiveness of three broad treatment areas. Method: Evidence from a number of countries was examined, both published and unpublished, and systematic reviews and meta-analyses were consulted. Results: The costs of schizophrenia are high and wide-ranging. They fall not only to health-care agencies but also to other parts of the public sector, to families, to sufferers themselves and to the wider society. However, there are interventions — a counselling intervention to address non-compliance with medication, family interventions to reduce levels of expressed emotion, and atypical antipsychotic drugs — that have been found to be not only effective (improving patient outcomes) but also appear to be cost-effective. Conclusion: Resource constraints and policy pressures make it increasingly common for economic as well as clinical questions to be asked about new modes of treatment. This is the new reality of mental health practice. Reliable evidence is now available to address these economic questions and can be factored into decision-making processes.