TY - JOUR
T1 - Cost-utility analysis of the UPRIGHT intervention promoting resilience in adolescents
AU - on behalf of the UPRIGHT Consortium
AU - Mar, Javier
AU - Larrañaga, Igor
AU - Ibarrondo, Oliver
AU - González-Pinto, Ana
AU - Hayas, Carlota las
AU - Fullaondo, Ane
AU - Izco-Basurko, Irantzu
AU - Alonso, Jordi
AU - Zorrilla, Iñaki
AU - Fernández-Sevillano, Jessica
AU - de Manuel, Esteban
AU - González, Nerea
AU - Mateo-Abad, Maider
AU - Martínez, Patricia Pérez
AU - Vergara, Itziar
AU - Gabrielli, Silvia
AU - Rizzi, Silvia
AU - Zwiefka, Antoni
AU - Krzyżanowski, Dominik
AU - Mazur, Iwona
AU - Jakubowska, Luba
AU - Poteralska, Renata
AU - Czyż, Piotr
AU - Andruszko, Urszula
AU - Błasiak, Paweł
AU - Krajewska, Katarzyna
AU - Pytlarz, Grzegorz
AU - Szczygieł-Grüdl, Ilona
AU - Hjemdal, Odin
AU - Morote, Roxanna
AU - Anyan, Frederick
AU - Gudmundsdottir, Dora Gudrun
AU - Karlsdottir, Solveig
AU - Knoop, Hans Henrik
AU - Ledertoug, Mette Marie
AU - Tidmand, Louise
AU - Olafsdottir, Anna Sigridur
AU - Arnfjord, Unnur B.
AU - Jonsdottir, Bryndis Jona
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, The Author(s).
PY - 2023/12
Y1 - 2023/12
N2 - Background: As mental health in adulthood is related to mental status during adolescence, school-based interventions have been proposed to improve resilience. The objective of this study was to build a simulation model representing the natural history of mental disorders in childhood, adolescence and youth to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the UPRIGHT school-based intervention in promoting resilience and mental health in adolescence. Methods: We built a discrete event simulation model fed with real-world data (cumulative incidence disaggregated into eight clusters) from the Basque Health Service database (609,381 individuals) to calculate utilities (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) and costs for the general population in two scenarios (base case and intervention). The model translated changes in the wellbeing of adolescents into different risks of mental illnesses for a time horizon of 30 years. Results: The number of cases of anxiety was estimated to fall by 5,125 or 9,592 and those of depression by 1,269 and 2,165 if the effect of the intervention lasted 2 or 5 years respectively. From a healthcare system perspective, the intervention was cost-effective for all cases considered with incremental cost-utility ratios always lower than €10,000/QALY and dominant for some subgroups. The intervention was always dominant when including indirect and non-medical costs (societal perspective). Conclusions: Although the primary analysis of the trial did not did not detect significant differences, the UPRIGHT intervention promoting positive mental health was dominant in the economic evaluation from the societal perspective. Promoting resilience was more cost-effective in the most deprived group. Despite a lack of information about the spillover effect in some sectors, the economic evaluation framework developed principally for pharmacoeconomics can be applied to interventions to promote resilience in adolescents. As prevention of mental health disorders is even more necessary in the post-coronavirus disease-19 era, such evaluation is essential to assess whether investment in mental health promotion would be good value for money by avoiding costs for healthcare providers and other stakeholders.
AB - Background: As mental health in adulthood is related to mental status during adolescence, school-based interventions have been proposed to improve resilience. The objective of this study was to build a simulation model representing the natural history of mental disorders in childhood, adolescence and youth to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the UPRIGHT school-based intervention in promoting resilience and mental health in adolescence. Methods: We built a discrete event simulation model fed with real-world data (cumulative incidence disaggregated into eight clusters) from the Basque Health Service database (609,381 individuals) to calculate utilities (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) and costs for the general population in two scenarios (base case and intervention). The model translated changes in the wellbeing of adolescents into different risks of mental illnesses for a time horizon of 30 years. Results: The number of cases of anxiety was estimated to fall by 5,125 or 9,592 and those of depression by 1,269 and 2,165 if the effect of the intervention lasted 2 or 5 years respectively. From a healthcare system perspective, the intervention was cost-effective for all cases considered with incremental cost-utility ratios always lower than €10,000/QALY and dominant for some subgroups. The intervention was always dominant when including indirect and non-medical costs (societal perspective). Conclusions: Although the primary analysis of the trial did not did not detect significant differences, the UPRIGHT intervention promoting positive mental health was dominant in the economic evaluation from the societal perspective. Promoting resilience was more cost-effective in the most deprived group. Despite a lack of information about the spillover effect in some sectors, the economic evaluation framework developed principally for pharmacoeconomics can be applied to interventions to promote resilience in adolescents. As prevention of mental health disorders is even more necessary in the post-coronavirus disease-19 era, such evaluation is essential to assess whether investment in mental health promotion would be good value for money by avoiding costs for healthcare providers and other stakeholders.
KW - Adolescents health
KW - Health policy
KW - Mental disorders
KW - Mental health
KW - Prevention
KW - Resilience
KW - Simulation model
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85150666452&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s12888-023-04665-4
DO - 10.1186/s12888-023-04665-4
M3 - Article
C2 - 36932364
AN - SCOPUS:85150666452
SN - 1471-244X
VL - 23
JO - BMC Psychiatry
JF - BMC Psychiatry
IS - 1
M1 - 178
ER -