Home > Cost-effectiveness of a combined classroom curriculum and parental intervention: economic evaluation of data from the Steps Towards Alcohol Misuse Prevention Programme cluster randomised controlled trial.

Agus, Ashley and McKay, Michael and Cole, Jonathan and Doherty, Paul and Foxcroft, David and Harvey, Séamus and Murphy, Lynn and Percy, Andrew and Sumnall, Harry (2019) Cost-effectiveness of a combined classroom curriculum and parental intervention: economic evaluation of data from the Steps Towards Alcohol Misuse Prevention Programme cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open , 9 , (7) , e027951.

URL: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/7/e027951.long

OBJECTIVES
This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Steps Towards Alcohol Misuse Prevention Programme (STAMPP) compared with education as normal (EAN) in reducing self-reported heavy episodic drinking (HED) in adolescents.

DESIGN
This is a cost-effectiveness analysis from a public sector perspective conducted as part of a cluster randomised trial.

SETTING
This study was conducted in 105 high schools in Northern Ireland and in Scotland.

PARTICIPANTS
Students in school year 8/S1 (aged 11-12) at baseline were included in the study.

INTERVENTIONS
This is a classroom-based alcohol education curricula, combined with a brief alcohol intervention for parents/carers.

OUTCOME MEASURES
The outcome of this study is the cost per young person experiencing HED avoided due to STAMPP at 33 months from baseline.

RESULTS
The total cost of STAMPP was £85 900, equivalent to £818 per school and £15 per pupil. Due to very low uptake of the parental component, we calculated costs of £692 per school and £13 per pupil without this element. Costs per pupil were reduced further to £426 per school and £8 per pupil when it was assumed there were no additional costs of classroom delivery if STAMPP was delivered as part of activities such as personal, social, health and economic education. STAMPP was associated with a significantly greater proportion of pupils experiencing a heavy drinking episode avoided (0.08/8%) and slightly lower public sector costs (mean difference -£17.19). At a notional willingness-to-pay threshold of £15 (reflecting the cost of STAMPP), the probability of STAMPP being cost-effective was 56%. This level of uncertainty reflected the substantial variability in the cost differences between groups.

CONCLUSIONS
STAMPP was relatively low cost and reduced HED. STAMPP was not associated with any clear public sector cost savings, but neither did it increase them or lead to any cost-shifting within the public sector categories. Further research is required to establish if the cost-effectiveness of STAMPP is sustained in the long term.


Item Type:Article
Date:2019
Page Range:e027951
Volume:9
Number:7
EndNote:View
Accession Number:HRB (Electronic Only)
Subjects:B Substances > Alcohol
J Health care, prevention and rehabilitation > Basic prevention categories > Targeted prevention
J Health care, prevention and rehabilitation > Prevention by sponsor or setting > School based prevention
J Health care, prevention and rehabilitation > Prevention approach > Family-focused prevention
L Social psychology and related concepts > Social context > School context
MP-MR Policy, planning, economics, work and social services > Programme planning, implementation, and evaluation > Programme and budget analysis (cost benefit)
T Demographic characteristics > Student (secondary level)

Repository Staff Only: item control page