Foster E Michael, Jones Damon E
School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Rosenau Hall, Campus Box no. 7445, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7445, USA.
J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2007 Dec;10(4):165-75.
Economic analyses of programs to prevent or treat behavioral health problems among children and youth are an important component of intervention research.
This study examines the cost-effectiveness of the Fast Track intervention, a multi-year, multi-component intervention designed to reduce violence in at-risk children. Analytic models estimate intervention cost-effectiveness allowing for sampling variation and considering alternative policy-maker willingness to pay levels.
Costs of the intervention were estimated using program budgets. The probability of intervention effectiveness is mapped against willingness to pay using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEAC). Cost-effectiveness is gauged using three outcomes measured in grade 9: diagnosis of conduct disorder; acts of interpersonal violence avoided; index criminal offense avoided.
Evaluation of the total sample shows that the intervention was not cost-effective at anticipated levels of policy maker's willingness to pay. For those most at-risk, however, the intervention was likely cost-effective.
Outcome measures are based on parent reports and so may be subject to respondent bias. Future costs related to conditions such as conduct disorder are speculative based on previous research.
Researchers must consider the population targeted for delivery of intervention services when evaluating cost-effectiveness of their intervention. This study indicates that the intervention was cost-effective only for youth most at-risk for behavioral problems. This result implies that overall cost-effectiveness would be improved by better targeting.
The intervention is cost-effective for the highest risk children. From a policy standpoint, this finding is encouraging since such children are likely to generate high costs for taxpayers and society over their lifetimes. Nonetheless, the initial outlay required to finance the program is substantial.
Interventionists should consider program costs in designing interventions in order to better balance feasibility with efficacy.
针对儿童和青少年预防或治疗行为健康问题项目的经济分析是干预研究的重要组成部分。
本研究考察了“快车道”干预措施的成本效益,这是一项旨在减少高危儿童暴力行为的多年期、多组成部分干预措施。分析模型估计了干预措施的成本效益,同时考虑了抽样变异,并考虑了政策制定者不同的支付意愿水平。
利用项目预算估算干预措施的成本。使用成本效益可接受性曲线(CEAC)将干预效果的概率与支付意愿进行映射。使用九年级时测量的三个结果来衡量成本效益:品行障碍的诊断;避免人际暴力行为;避免索引犯罪。
对总样本的评估表明,在政策制定者预期的支付意愿水平下,该干预措施不具有成本效益。然而,对于那些风险最高的人来说,该干预措施可能具有成本效益。
结果测量基于家长报告,因此可能存在应答偏差。基于先前的研究,与品行障碍等情况相关的未来成本具有推测性。
研究人员在评估其干预措施的成本效益时,必须考虑干预服务的目标人群。本研究表明,该干预措施仅对行为问题风险最高的青少年具有成本效益。这一结果意味着,通过更好地确定目标人群,总体成本效益将得到提高。
该干预措施对风险最高的儿童具有成本效益。从政策角度来看,这一发现令人鼓舞,因为这类儿童在其一生中可能会给纳税人和社会带来高昂成本。尽管如此,为该项目提供资金所需的初始支出相当可观。
干预者在设计干预措施时应考虑项目成本,以便更好地在可行性和有效性之间取得平衡。