1. Housing and supportive services for young mothers experiencing substance use disorder and homelessness: Cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized trial.
- Author
-
Yilmazer T, Zhang J, Chavez L, Famelia R, Feng X, Ford J, Kelleher K, and Slesnick N
- Subjects
- Humans, Female, Adolescent, Young Adult, Depression epidemiology, Depression economics, Depression therapy, Depression psychology, Adult, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis, Substance-Related Disorders economics, Substance-Related Disorders epidemiology, Substance-Related Disorders therapy, Substance-Related Disorders psychology, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Housing economics, Ill-Housed Persons psychology, Mothers psychology
- Abstract
Background: Mothers experiencing homelessness and caring for young children struggle with high rates of substance use and mental health problems. A comprehensive supportive housing intervention was implemented to assist young mothers experiencing substance use disorder (SUD) and homelessness. The cost-effectiveness of this intensive intervention could inform future dissemination., Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial that lasted from May 2015 to October 2018. Mothers experiencing homelessness between the ages of 18-24 years with a SUD were randomly assigned to housing+support services (HOU + SS) (n = 80), housing-only (HOU) (n = 80), or services as usual SAU (n = 80). Using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), the study compared the costs of HOU + SS and HOU to SAU for three outcomes: housing stability (percent days of stable housing), substance use (percent days of substance use), and depressive symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory score). Direct intervention costs of HOU + SS and HOU from both payor and societal perspectives were estimated. Cost data were collected from detailed study financial records. Outcomes were taken from 6-month assessments., Results: The average societal cost of HOU + SS per participant was $5114 [CI 95 %, $4949-5278], while the average societal cost of HOU was $3248 [CI 95 %, $ 3,140-$3341] (2019 U.S. dollars). The calculated ICERs show that HOU was more cost-effective than HOU + SS and SAU for housing outcome. For illicit drug use, HOU + SS was more cost-effective than HOU. Finally, for depressive symptoms, neither HOU + SS or HOU were more cost effective than SAU., Conclusion: While HOU is more cost-effective for increasing housing, HOU + SS is more cost-effective for reducing illicit drug use. However, housing without improvements in substance use may not be sustainable, and supportive services are likely essential for improved well-being overall beyond the housing outcome alone., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF