Economic Evaluation of Family-Focused Programs When Parents Have a Mental Health Problem: Methodological Considerations

The role of health economics within health technology assessment: past, present, and future - an Austrian perspective

In many countries, the economics domain forms a routine part of health technology assessments (HTA) next to analyzing the comparative effectiveness and safety of a technology. The method applied most often is economic evaluation, such as cost-effectiveness analysis, which is supposed to support the efficient use of resources. In Austria, economic evaluation has played a negligible role in HTA and reimbursement decisions, even though the country faces the same public healthcare sustainability challenges as others. In this commentary, we argue that while health economics will need to play a more active role in HTA-related decision support to deal with those challenges, current approaches in other countries may have to be broadened to fit the Austrian context. We are outlining four arguments to underpin this perspective: First, economic evaluations (in their current form) are of limited benefit for supporting reimbursement decisions of new high-priced technologies. Second, a broader variety of health economic methods is needed to address the scope of technologies. Third, applying health economic methods requires a reflection on their underlying values. Finally, health economics within HTA needs to go beyond microeconomic analysis of interventions. We are suggesting several alternative methods and approaches, encouraging out-of-the-box thinking and experimenting with methods developed in the academic context but rarely applied in routine HTA. Although some of our topics are unique to Austria, others may equally apply to other healthcare systems. With our thoughts, we aim to stimulate discussions for further developing health economics within HTA in Austria and internationally.

Acceptability, engagement and exploratory outcomes and costs of a co-designed intervention to support children of parents with a mental illness: Mixed-methods evaluation and descriptive analysis

Children whose parents have a mental illness are much more likely to experience mental health problems and other adverse long-term impacts. Child-centred psychosocial interventions can be effective, but not much is known about how to design and implement them in different settings. A pre-post, mixed methods, single-arm evaluation of a co-designed social support intervention with parents and children (4-18 years) measured parents' mental health (PHQ-9), perceived social support (ENRICHD), parental self-efficacy (PSAM) and children's mental health (SDQ), quality of life (Kidscreen-27), and child service use (CAMHSRI-EU) at baseline and 6 months. Qualitative data were gathered at 6 months to explore parents' and children's experience with the intervention. Twenty-nine parents and 21 children completed baseline and follow-up questionnaires; 22 parents and 17 children participated in interviews. Parents' depression (MD -1.36, SD 8.08), perceived social support (MD 1, SD 5.91), and children's mental health potentially improved, and children's service use and costs potentially reduced (€224.6 vs. €122.2, MD 112.4). Parental self-efficacy was potentially reduced (MD -0.11, SD 3.33). The sample was too small to perform statistical analysis. Favourable themes emerged describing the high satisfaction with the intervention, parents' improved understanding of the impact of their mental health problems on children, and improvements in parent-child relationships. This study contributes to an emerging evidence base for co-designed child-centred interventions to prevent the transgenerational transmission of poor mental health.

Types and aspects of support that young carers need and value, and barriers and enablers to access: the REBIAS-YC qualitative study

Background

Many children and young people in England provide support to family members who are disabled, have mental or physical ill health, or misuse drugs or alcohol. Providing care can negatively impact children and young people's education, employment, health and social participation, with associated costs. Support is needed to prevent and reduce these negative impacts. The study sought to provide new knowledge and address prior research gaps regarding how best to support young carers from their perspective and that of the people they care for.

Objectives

To address the following questions: What types, components or features of services and other support are seen as helpful, valued, and acceptable to young people who look after someone at home and the people they support? Conversely, what is found to be less or unhelpful? What additional support is perceived as needed? What are the barriers experienced by young and young adult carers in seeking and accessing services for themselves or the person they support? What are the barriers and facilitators for practitioners in providing support and services perceived as valued, helpful and needed by young and young adult carers and the people they support?

Design and setting

In-depth qualitative methodology using focus groups, in-depth semistructured interviews and workshops in four localities in England.

Participants

One hundred and thirty-three carers aged 9-25 years with a range of caring and life circumstances and sociodemographic characteristics. Seventeen adult care recipients (parents) with a range of physical and/or mental healthcare and support needs. Nineteen practitioners from schools, colleges, young carers organisations, voluntary sector services, mental health services, the National Health Service, adult social care and local authority adult and children's social care commissioners.

Results

The types and aspects of support that young carers and their families need, and value when received, include: support that reduces or removes their practical and emotional caring responsibilities; support to mitigate the negative impacts of care and help with other life issues; information and advice about services and wider resources and support; someone trusted available to talk to; greater awareness, recognition and understanding; and choice, flexibility, and co-development of plans and solutions. We found a great deal of unmet need for support, and variation in type and quality of support received, including geographically.

Limitations

Potential limitations are that we were not able to engage with, or recruit, young carers from some intended subgroups, meaning some perspectives are missing. Partly because of COVID-19 measures during the study, we mainly recruited through young carers organisations and their family projects, although this was balanced by recruitment through schools and extensive outreach and engagement by the collaborating organisations prior to the project starting.

Conclusions

Action is now needed to consistently and sustainably implement the types of support that young carers and the people they care for say they need and value.

Future work

Future work should include more research from the perspectives of young carers and the people they care for, especially from particularly marginalised groups; and research to understand what works and how to improve implementation of the support needed and valued.

Study registration

This study is registered as Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13478876. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN13478876.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR129645) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 36. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Implementing an integrated family approach in mental health care for families experiencing complex and multiple problems: a case example in Amsterdam

For youth care professionals who work with families with complex needs, we implemented an interagency, family-focused approach involving child and adult mental health care services and child protection services. The primary objective of the collaboration was to minimize fragmentation in service delivery and to improve practitioners' self-efficacy in supporting families. A total of 50 families were enrolled between 2020 and 2023. Quantitative descriptive analysis was conducted to map the sample characteristics and the correlations between the practitioners' consultation requests and the recommendations they received. We evaluated the applicability of the model using semi-structured interviews. Results revealed the frequent socioeconomic and psychosocial challenges and co-current mental health issues faced by the families. As expected, practitioners who work with families experiencing complex and multiple problems encountered a range of difficulties in their service delivery. These related to barriers such as poor role demarcation between organizations, practitioners' unrealistic expectations of other services, the impact of multiple problems on family well-being, and complicated family dynamics. The interprofessional collaboration improved the practitioners' self-efficacy in supporting families. They also perceived improvements in child safety. The study emphasizes the need for clear pathways for youth care practitioners to obtain assistance from adult mental health services and to liaise with community support and services. It proposes including adults and young people with lived experiences in the interprofessional collaboration. The study data provides initial evidence that the interagency model has added value for youth care professionals who struggle with issues in family-focused care.