Search

Objective: To examine the health care costs associated with mental disorders and subthreshold mental disorders within a nationally representative sample of children and adolescents in Australia. Method: Data were derived from the Young Minds Matter Survey (N = 6,310). Mental disorders were classified using the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children Version IV. Participant data were linked to administrative data on health care costs. Adjusted generalized linear regression models and two-part models were used to estimate mean differences in costs between those with a mental disorder or subthreshold disorder and those without. Results: Costs associated with health care attendances and medications were higher for children and adolescents with mental disorders and subthreshold mental disorders compared to those without a mental disorder. The additional population health care costs due to mental disorders amounted to AUD$234 million annually in children and adolescents, of which approximately 16% was attributed to out-of-pocket costs. Findings showed that those with subthreshold mental disorders or comorbid mental disorders have substantial additional costs of Medicare-funded medical and pharmaceutical services. Conclusion and implication: Mental disorders in children and adolescents are associated with significant health care costs. Further research is needed to ensure that this population is receiving effective and efficient care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Target-D, a new person-centred e-health platform matching depression care to symptom severity prognosis (minimal/mild, moderate or severe) has demonstrated greater improvement in depressive symptoms than usual care plus attention control. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Target-D compared to usual care from a health sector and partial societal perspective across 3-month and 12-month follow-up., Methods and Findings: A cost-utility analysis was conducted alongside the Target-D randomised controlled trial; which involved 1,868 participants attending 14 general practices in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. Data on costs were collected using a resource use questionnaire administered concurrently with all other outcome measures at baseline, 3-month and 12-month follow-up. Intervention costs were assessed using financial records compiled during the trial. All costs were expressed in Australian dollars (A$) for the 2018-19 financial year. QALY outcomes were derived using the Assessment of Quality of Life-8D (AQoL-8D) questionnaire. On a per person basis, the Target-D intervention cost between $14 (minimal/mild prognostic group) and $676 (severe group). Health sector and societal costs were not significantly different between trial arms at both 3 and 12 months. Relative to a A$50,000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold, the probability of Target-D being cost-effective under a health sector perspective was 81% at 3 months and 96% at 12 months. From a societal perspective, the probability of cost-effectiveness was 30% at 3 months and 80% at 12 months., Conclusions: Target-D is likely to represent good value for money for health care decision makers. Further evaluation of QALY outcomes should accompany any routine roll-out to assess comparability of results to those observed in the trial. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12616000537459)., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.