Assessing the Cost-Effectiveness of Interventions That Simultaneously Prevent High Body Mass Index and Eating Disorders

A systematic review of economic evaluations for opioid misuse, cannabis and illicit drug use prevention

BACKGROUND

Substance use disorders negatively affect global disease burden. Effective preventive interventions are available, but whether they provide value for money is unclear.

AIMS

This review looks at the cost-effectiveness evidence of preventive interventions for cannabis use, opioid misuse and illicit drug use.

METHOD

Literature search was undertaken in Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit through EBSCOhost and EMBASE, up to May 2021. Grey literature search was conducted as supplement. Studies included were full economic evaluations or return-on-investment (ROI) analyses for preventing opioid misuse, cannabis and illicit drug use. English-language restriction was used. Outcomes extracted were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) or ROI ratios, with costs presented in 2019 United States dollars. Quality was assessed with the Drummond checklist.

RESULTS

Eleven full economic evaluation studies were identified from 5674 citations, with all studies conducted in high-income countries. Most aimed to prevent opioid misuse (n = 4), cannabis (n = 3) or illicit drug use (n = 5). Modelling was the predominant methodology (n = 7). Five evaluated school-based universal interventions targeting children and adolescents (aged <18 years). Five cost-benefit studies reported cost-savings. One cost-effectiveness and two cost-utility analysis studies supported the cost-effectiveness of interventions, as ICERs fell under prespecified value-for-money thresholds.

CONCLUSIONS

There are limited economic evaluations of preventive interventions for opioid misuse, cannabis and illicit drug use. Family-based intervention (ParentCorps), school-based interventions (Social and Emotional Training and Project ALERT) and a doctor's programme to assess patient risk of misusing narcotics ('the Network System to Prevent Doctor-Shopping for Narcotics') show promising cost-effectiveness and warrant consideration.

Prevention of eating disorders: 2020 in review

Fifteen prevention-related publications in Eating Disorders during 2020 are reviewed. Two models frame this analysis: (1) the Mental Health Intervention Spectrum: health promotion → types of prevention → case identification and referral → treatment; and (2) parsing phases of prevention into a cycle: rationale, theory, and methodology, shaped by critical, integrative reviews → clarification of risk and protective factors → program innovation and feasibility studies → efficacy and effectiveness research → program dissemination. In this cycle the first two phases and the last phase inform advocacy for social policies supporting prevention. Ten articles comprising a special issue on yoga demonstrate the value of investing in translational prevention science that acknowledges (a) embodying experiences as a broad category of protective factors; (b) the utility of multidimensional theoretical models; and (c) social justice issues that advocacy efforts must address to make programs widely and equitably available. Other articles reviewed show, for example, that studies of emotion dysregulation and emotional eating are needed to enter a prevention cycle that moves us beyond body image (or weight/shape) concerns in defining high-risk groups and developing indicated prevention. Finally, implications of the absence of efficacy, effectiveness, dissemination, and advocacy studies are discussed.

Cost-effectiveness evidence of mental health prevention and promotion interventions: A systematic review of economic evaluations

BACKGROUND

The prevention of mental disorders and promotion of mental health and well-being are growing fields. Whether mental health promotion and prevention interventions provide value for money in children, adolescents, adults, and older adults is unclear. The aim of the current study is to update 2 existing reviews of cost-effectiveness studies in this field in order to determine whether such interventions are cost-effective.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Electronic databases (including MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and EconLit through EBSCO and Embase) were searched for published cost-effectiveness studies of prevention of mental disorders and promotion of mental health and well-being from 2008 to 2020. The quality of studies was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies Instrument (QHES). The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (# CRD42019127778). The primary outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) or return on investment (ROI) ratio across all studies. A total of 65 studies met the inclusion criteria of a full economic evaluation, of which, 23 targeted children and adolescents, 35 targeted adults, while the remaining targeted older adults. A large number of studies focused on prevention of depression and/or anxiety disorders, followed by promotion of mental health and well-being and other mental disorders. Although there was high heterogeneity in terms of the design among included economic evaluations, most studies consistently found that interventions for mental health prevention and promotion were cost-effective or cost saving. The review found that targeted prevention was likely to be cost-effective compared to universal prevention. Screening plus psychological interventions (e.g., cognitive behavioural therapy [CBT]) at school were the most cost-effective interventions for prevention of mental disorders in children and adolescents, while parenting interventions and workplace interventions had good evidence in mental health promotion. There is inconclusive evidence for preventive interventions for mental disorders or mental health promotion in older adults. While studies were of general high quality, there was limited evidence available from low- and middle-income countries. The review was limited to studies where mental health was the primary outcome and may have missed general health promoting strategies that could also prevent mental disorder or promote mental health. Some ROI studies might not be included given that these studies are commonly published in grey literature rather than in the academic literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review found a significant growth of economic evaluations in prevention of mental disorders or promotion of mental health and well-being over the last 10 years. Although several interventions for mental health prevention and promotion provide good value for money, the varied quality as well as methodologies used in economic evaluations limit the generalisability of conclusions about cost-effectiveness. However, the finding that the majority of studies especially in children, adolescents, and adults demonstrated good value for money is promising. Research on cost-effectiveness in low-middle income settings is required.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019127778.