The Cost-Effectiveness of Alcohol Interventions November 10, 2005
News Summary
Healthcare systems and funding agencies often use cost-effectiveness data to make resource-allocation decisions about which treatment options to offer patients. Two recent reviews illustrated different approaches to cost-effectiveness analysis as applied to alcohol interventions. In the first study, researchers used computer simulation models and published data from alcohol intervention trials to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness (CE) ratio (i.e., dollars* needed for each quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] gained) of several approaches to treating problem drinking and alcohol dependence.
- Various brief interventions for problem drinking yielded CE ratios of $62 to $505 per QALY (compared with no intervention).
- Motivation enhancement therapy (MET), which focuses on motivation and commitment to change, yielded CE ratios of $1613 to $2531 per QALY (compared with an initial assessment, feedback, and education).
- Naltrexone plus counseling for severe alcohol dependence yielded a CE ratio of $9750 per QALY (compared with placebo plus counseling).
In the second study, researchers performed a cost-effectiveness analysis within a randomized clinical trial of MET (n=347) versus social behavior and network therapy (n=261) for alcohol problems. They collected data on treatment costs,** health and societal resources use, and QALYs.
- The more expensive social behavior and network therapy yielded the same number of QALYs as did MET.
- Social behavior and network therapy cost $331 on average and yielded a net reduction in resource use of $1195 whereas MET cost $193 on average and yielded a net reduction of $888.
Comments by Kevin L. Kraemer, MD, MSc:
In the first study, the CE ratios for most interventions studied were well below what purchasers of healthcare commonly pay to treat other diseases (e.g., $50,000 to $100,000 per QALY). In the second study, the social behavior and network therapy program was more expensive, but no more effective, than was MET. Regardless, both therapies saved about 5 times as much in health and societal resources use as they cost to deliver. * For purposes of this summary, 2003 Australian dollars were converted to 2003 US dollars using historical exchange rates.
** For purposes of this summary, 2001 UK pounds were converted to 2001 US dollars using historical exchange rates.
Reference:
Mortimer D, Segal L. Economic evaluation of interventions for problem drinking and alcohol dependence: cost per QALY estimates. Alcohol Alcohol. 2005;40(6):549-555.
UKATT Research Team. Cost effectiveness of treatment for alcohol problems: findings of the randomized UK alcohol treatment trial (UKATT). BMJ. 2005;331(7516):544.
Reprinted with permission from Alcohol and Health: Current Evidence.
COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE: