Jeffrey S. Hoch, PhD, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Western Ontario, UWO School of Medicine and Dentistry, Kresge Building, London, ON N6A 5C1, Canada, (519) 661-2111 x86270, jeffhoch@biostats.uwo.ca and Carolyn S. Dewa, MPH, PhD, Health Systems Research & Consulting Unit/Dept of Psychiatry, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health/University of Toronto, 250 College Street, Toronto, ON M5S 2S1, Canada.

This paper reviews the findings of three economic evaluations of prominent community mental health interventions: assertive community treatment (ACT), individual placement and support (IPS), and residential crisis care (RCC). Analytical challenges with the economic evaluations point to lessons about cost-effectiveness analysis for mental health care. The main messages are: 1) it is important to illustrate variation in estimates of cost-effectiveness and explore reasons for it; 2) frequently the “correct” outcome to use is not clear; and 3) the practical definition of what is cost-effective is elusive. These lessons motivate the need to use a method like the net benefit regression framework (NBRF). This framework allows for a regression-based cost-effectiveness analysis that is sensitive to the above concerns. The NBRF does not “solve” all of the problems, but instead provides a tool to address the issues. Researchers learning from the lessons suggested by the three cost-effectiveness analyses may provide policy makers with more useful economic evaluations.

Learning Objectives:

• "At the conclusion of the session, the participant (learner) in this session will be able to describe why statistics is an important part of a cost-effectiveness analysis"

Keywords: Economic Analysis, Statistics

Presenting author's disclosure statement:
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.