Rao Isabelle J, Brandeau Margaret L
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Jun 2;8(6):e2517103. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.17103.
The number of people experiencing homelessness (PEH) in the US has increased substantially in recent years. The leading cause of death among PEH is drug overdose, with opioids accounting for the majority of such deaths.
To assess the costs and health outcomes of providing stable housing to PEH who have opioid use disorder (OUD).
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This economic evaluation conducted a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of PEH with OUD in the US.
Provision of stable housing, with no requirement to enter OUD treatment.
Primary outcomes were overdoses and deaths over 5 years, lifetime per-person discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) compared with the status quo (no housing provision).
In a model of 1000 PEH (700 male; mean [SD] age, 46.4 [14.0]; 300 female; mean [SD] age, 46.5 [14.3]), under the status quo, 191 (95% CI, 152-237) deaths occurred over 5 years (58 [95% CI, 44-78] from overdose and 133 [95% CI, 101-167] from other causes). With the housing intervention, 140 (95% CI, 114-185) deaths occurred (53 [95% CI, 39-76] from overdose and 87 [95% CI, 73-110] from other causes). The housing intervention was associated with a gain of 3.59 (95% CI, 3.13-3.98) lifetime QALYs per person at an incremental cost of $26 800 (95% CI, $21 200-$32 300) per QALY gained compared with the status quo. Over extensive sensitivity analyses, the ICER remained less than $90 000 per QALY gained.
This economic evaluation found that investing in stable housing for this marginalized population, even with no requirement to enter OUD treatment, was associated with cost-effectiveness, fewer deaths, and improved health outcomes. Efforts are urgently needed to improve the health of PEH with OUD; it is essential to understand the outcomes and cost-effectiveness of housing provision for this marginalized population because housing status is a key social determinant of health.
近年来,美国无家可归者的数量大幅增加。无家可归者的主要死因是药物过量,其中阿片类药物导致的此类死亡占大多数。
评估为患有阿片类药物使用障碍(OUD)的无家可归者提供稳定住房的成本和健康结果。
设计、背景和参与者:这项经济评估对美国患有OUD的无家可归者进行了基于模型的成本效益分析。
提供稳定住房,无需接受OUD治疗。
主要结局是5年内的药物过量和死亡情况、每人一生的贴现质量调整生命年(QALY)和成本,以及与现状(不提供住房)相比的增量成本效益比(ICER)。
在一个包含1000名无家可归者的模型中(700名男性;平均[标准差]年龄为46.4[14.0]岁;300名女性;平均[标准差]年龄为46.5[14.3]岁),在现状下,5年内发生了191例(95%置信区间,152 - 237)死亡(58例[95%置信区间,44 - 78]死于药物过量,133例[95%置信区间,101 - 167]死于其他原因)。通过住房干预,发生了140例(95%置信区间,114 - 185)死亡(53例[95%置信区间,39 - 76]死于药物过量,87例[95%置信区间,73 - 110]死于其他原因)。与现状相比,住房干预使每人一生的QALY增加了3.59(95%置信区间,3.13 - 3.98),每获得一个QALY的增量成本为26,800美元(95%置信区间,21,200 - 32,300美元)。在广泛的敏感性分析中,ICER仍低于每获得一个QALY 90,000美元。
这项经济评估发现,为这一边缘化人群投资稳定住房,即使无需接受OUD治疗,也具有成本效益、可减少死亡并改善健康结果。迫切需要努力改善患有OUD的无家可归者的健康状况;了解为这一边缘化人群提供住房的结果和成本效益至关重要,因为住房状况是健康的关键社会决定因素。