Kanters Tim A, Timman Reinier, Zijlstra-Vlasveld Moniek C, Muntingh Anna, Huijbregts Klaas M, van Steenbergen-Weijenburg Kirsten M, Bouwmans Clazien A M, van der Feltz-Cornelis Christina M, Hakkaart-van Roijen Leona
Institute for Medical Technology Assessment (iMTA), Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, the Netherlands,
J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2019 Mar 1;22(1):15-24.
The Treatment Inventory Cost in Psychiatric patients (TIC-P) instrument is designed to measure societal costs in patients with psychiatric disorders and to be applied in economic evaluations. Efforts have been made to minimize respondents' burden by reducing the number of questions and meanwhile retaining the comprehensiveness of the instrument. Previously, a TIC-P Mini version and a TIC-P Midi version were developed and tested in a predominantly inpatient patient population.
The aims of this study are to examine the comprehensiveness of the abridged questionnaires in estimating the societal costs for patients with anxiety or depressive disorders and to assess the impact of productivity costs on the total costs.
The comprehensiveness of the abridged versions of the TIC-P was assessed in four populations: a group of primary care patients with anxiety disorders (n=175) and three groups of patients with major depressive disorders in various outpatient settings (n=140; n=125; and n=79). Comprehensiveness was measured using the proportion of total health care costs and productivity costs covered by the abridged versions compared to the full-length TIC-P. Costs were calculated according to the guidelines for costing studies using the Dutch costing manual.
Our results showed that the TIC-P Mini covered 26%-64% of health care costs and the TIC-P Midi captured 54%-79% of health care costs. Health care costs in these populations were predominantly dispersed over primary care, outpatient hospital care, outpatient specialist care and inpatient hospital care. The TIC-P Midi and TIC-P Mini captured 22% and 0% of primary care costs respectively. In contrast, inpatient hospital care costs and outpatient specialist mental health care costs were almost fully included in the abridged versions. Costs due to lost productivity as measured by the full-length TIC-P were substantial, representing 38% to 92% of total costs.
A reduction of the number of items resulted in a substantial loss in the ability to measure health care costs compared to the full-length TIC-P, because these outpatient populations consumed health care from a variety of health care providers. Two limitations of the study need to be stressed. Firstly, the number of patients in each of the four studies was relatively small. However, results were consistent over the four studies despite the small number of patients. Secondly, we did not take costs of medication into account.
In developing mental health policy, it is important to include considerations on cost-effectiveness. Increasing the evidence on instruments to measure costs from a societal perspective may support policymakers to adopt a broader perspective.
The TIC-P Mini is not suitable to capture health care costs in outpatients with anxiety or depressive disorders. The comprehensiveness of TIC-P Midi compared to the full-length TIC-P varied. The TIC-P Midi should therefore be revised in order to better capture costs in all patient groups.
精神科患者治疗费用清单(TIC-P)工具旨在衡量精神障碍患者的社会成本,并应用于经济评估。已努力通过减少问题数量来减轻受访者负担,同时保持该工具的全面性。此前,已开发出TIC-P迷你版和TIC-P中型版,并在以住院患者为主的人群中进行了测试。
本研究的目的是检验简化问卷在估计焦虑或抑郁障碍患者社会成本方面的全面性,并评估生产力成本对总成本的影响。
在四组人群中评估了TIC-P简化版的全面性:一组患有焦虑症的初级保健患者(n = 175)和三组在不同门诊环境中患有重度抑郁症的患者(n = 140;n = 125;n = 79)。通过将简化版与完整的TIC-P相比所涵盖的总医疗保健成本和生产力成本的比例来衡量全面性。根据使用荷兰成本核算手册的成本核算研究指南计算成本。
我们的结果表明,TIC-P迷你版涵盖了26%-64%的医疗保健成本,TIC-P中型版涵盖了54%-79%的医疗保健成本。这些人群的医疗保健成本主要分散在初级保健、门诊医院护理、门诊专科护理和住院医院护理上。TIC-P中型版和TIC-P迷你版分别涵盖了22%和0%的初级保健成本。相比之下,住院医院护理成本和门诊专科心理健康护理成本几乎完全包含在简化版中。通过完整的TIC-P衡量的因生产力损失导致的成本相当可观,占总成本的38%至92%。
与完整的TIC-P相比,项目数量的减少导致衡量医疗保健成本的能力大幅下降,因为这些门诊人群从各种医疗保健提供者那里接受医疗服务。需要强调该研究的两个局限性。首先,四项研究中每组的患者数量相对较少。然而,尽管患者数量较少,但四项研究的结果是一致的。其次,我们没有考虑药物成本。
在制定精神卫生政策时,纳入成本效益考量很重要。增加从社会角度衡量成本的工具的证据可能支持政策制定者采用更广泛的视角。
TIC-P迷你版不适用于捕捉焦虑或抑郁障碍门诊患者的医疗保健成本。与完整的TIC-P相比,TIC-P中型版的全面性有所不同。因此,应修订TIC-P中型版以便更好地捕捉所有患者群体的成本。