Alcohol interventions for trauma patients treated in emergency departments and hospitals

A cost benefit analysis

Larry M. Gentilello, Beth E. Ebel, Thomas M. Wickizer, David S Salkever, Frederick P. Rivara

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: To determine if brief alcohol interventions in trauma centers reduce health care costs. Summary Background Data: Alcohol-use disorders are the leading cause of injury. Brief interventions in trauma patients reduce subsequent alcohol intake and injury recidivism but have not yet been widely implemented. Methods: This was a cost-benefit analysis. The study population consisted of injured patients treated in an emergency department or admitted to a hospital. The analysis was restricted to direct injury-related medical costs only so that it would be most meaningful to hospitals, insurers, and government agencies responsible for health care costs. Underlying assumptions used to arrive at future benefits, including costs, injury rates, and intervention effectiveness, were derived from published nationwide databases, epidemiologic, and clinical trial data. Model parameters were examined with 1-way sensitivity analyses, and the cost-benefit ratio was calculated. Monte Carlo analysis was used to determine the strategy-selection confidence intervals. Results: An estimated 27% of all injured adult patients are candidates for a brief alcohol intervention. The net cost savings of the intervention was $89 per patient screened, or $330 for each patient offered an intervention. The benefit in reduced health expenditures resulted in savings of $3.81 for every $1.00 spent on screening and intervention. This finding was robust to various assumptions regarding probability of accepting an intervention, cost of screening and intervention, and risk of injury recidivism. Monte Carlo simulations found that offering a brief intervention would save health care costs in 91.5% of simulated runs. If interventions were routinely offered to eligible injured adult patients nationwide, the potential net savings could approach $1.82 billion annually. Conclusions: Screening and brief intervention for alcohol problems in trauma patients is cost-effective and should be routinely implemented.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)541-550
Number of pages10
JournalAnnals of Surgery
Volume241
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2005

Fingerprint

Hospital Costs
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Hospital Emergency Service
Alcohols
Wounds and Injuries
Health Care Costs
Costs and Cost Analysis
Government Agencies
Insurance Carriers
Cost Savings
Trauma Centers
Health Expenditures
Clinical Trials
Databases
Confidence Intervals
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Alcohol interventions for trauma patients treated in emergency departments and hospitals : A cost benefit analysis. / Gentilello, Larry M.; Ebel, Beth E.; Wickizer, Thomas M.; Salkever, David S; Rivara, Frederick P.

In: Annals of Surgery, Vol. 241, No. 4, 04.2005, p. 541-550.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gentilello, Larry M. ; Ebel, Beth E. ; Wickizer, Thomas M. ; Salkever, David S ; Rivara, Frederick P. / Alcohol interventions for trauma patients treated in emergency departments and hospitals : A cost benefit analysis. In: Annals of Surgery. 2005 ; Vol. 241, No. 4. pp. 541-550.
@article{094c8408fb7b4966bfb4940ff3368748,
title = "Alcohol interventions for trauma patients treated in emergency departments and hospitals: A cost benefit analysis",
abstract = "Objective: To determine if brief alcohol interventions in trauma centers reduce health care costs. Summary Background Data: Alcohol-use disorders are the leading cause of injury. Brief interventions in trauma patients reduce subsequent alcohol intake and injury recidivism but have not yet been widely implemented. Methods: This was a cost-benefit analysis. The study population consisted of injured patients treated in an emergency department or admitted to a hospital. The analysis was restricted to direct injury-related medical costs only so that it would be most meaningful to hospitals, insurers, and government agencies responsible for health care costs. Underlying assumptions used to arrive at future benefits, including costs, injury rates, and intervention effectiveness, were derived from published nationwide databases, epidemiologic, and clinical trial data. Model parameters were examined with 1-way sensitivity analyses, and the cost-benefit ratio was calculated. Monte Carlo analysis was used to determine the strategy-selection confidence intervals. Results: An estimated 27{\%} of all injured adult patients are candidates for a brief alcohol intervention. The net cost savings of the intervention was $89 per patient screened, or $330 for each patient offered an intervention. The benefit in reduced health expenditures resulted in savings of $3.81 for every $1.00 spent on screening and intervention. This finding was robust to various assumptions regarding probability of accepting an intervention, cost of screening and intervention, and risk of injury recidivism. Monte Carlo simulations found that offering a brief intervention would save health care costs in 91.5{\%} of simulated runs. If interventions were routinely offered to eligible injured adult patients nationwide, the potential net savings could approach $1.82 billion annually. Conclusions: Screening and brief intervention for alcohol problems in trauma patients is cost-effective and should be routinely implemented.",
author = "Gentilello, {Larry M.} and Ebel, {Beth E.} and Wickizer, {Thomas M.} and Salkever, {David S} and Rivara, {Frederick P.}",
year = "2005",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1097/01.sla.0000157133.80396.1c",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "241",
pages = "541--550",
journal = "Annals of Surgery",
issn = "0003-4932",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Alcohol interventions for trauma patients treated in emergency departments and hospitals

T2 - A cost benefit analysis

AU - Gentilello, Larry M.

AU - Ebel, Beth E.

AU - Wickizer, Thomas M.

AU - Salkever, David S

AU - Rivara, Frederick P.

PY - 2005/4

Y1 - 2005/4

N2 - Objective: To determine if brief alcohol interventions in trauma centers reduce health care costs. Summary Background Data: Alcohol-use disorders are the leading cause of injury. Brief interventions in trauma patients reduce subsequent alcohol intake and injury recidivism but have not yet been widely implemented. Methods: This was a cost-benefit analysis. The study population consisted of injured patients treated in an emergency department or admitted to a hospital. The analysis was restricted to direct injury-related medical costs only so that it would be most meaningful to hospitals, insurers, and government agencies responsible for health care costs. Underlying assumptions used to arrive at future benefits, including costs, injury rates, and intervention effectiveness, were derived from published nationwide databases, epidemiologic, and clinical trial data. Model parameters were examined with 1-way sensitivity analyses, and the cost-benefit ratio was calculated. Monte Carlo analysis was used to determine the strategy-selection confidence intervals. Results: An estimated 27% of all injured adult patients are candidates for a brief alcohol intervention. The net cost savings of the intervention was $89 per patient screened, or $330 for each patient offered an intervention. The benefit in reduced health expenditures resulted in savings of $3.81 for every $1.00 spent on screening and intervention. This finding was robust to various assumptions regarding probability of accepting an intervention, cost of screening and intervention, and risk of injury recidivism. Monte Carlo simulations found that offering a brief intervention would save health care costs in 91.5% of simulated runs. If interventions were routinely offered to eligible injured adult patients nationwide, the potential net savings could approach $1.82 billion annually. Conclusions: Screening and brief intervention for alcohol problems in trauma patients is cost-effective and should be routinely implemented.

AB - Objective: To determine if brief alcohol interventions in trauma centers reduce health care costs. Summary Background Data: Alcohol-use disorders are the leading cause of injury. Brief interventions in trauma patients reduce subsequent alcohol intake and injury recidivism but have not yet been widely implemented. Methods: This was a cost-benefit analysis. The study population consisted of injured patients treated in an emergency department or admitted to a hospital. The analysis was restricted to direct injury-related medical costs only so that it would be most meaningful to hospitals, insurers, and government agencies responsible for health care costs. Underlying assumptions used to arrive at future benefits, including costs, injury rates, and intervention effectiveness, were derived from published nationwide databases, epidemiologic, and clinical trial data. Model parameters were examined with 1-way sensitivity analyses, and the cost-benefit ratio was calculated. Monte Carlo analysis was used to determine the strategy-selection confidence intervals. Results: An estimated 27% of all injured adult patients are candidates for a brief alcohol intervention. The net cost savings of the intervention was $89 per patient screened, or $330 for each patient offered an intervention. The benefit in reduced health expenditures resulted in savings of $3.81 for every $1.00 spent on screening and intervention. This finding was robust to various assumptions regarding probability of accepting an intervention, cost of screening and intervention, and risk of injury recidivism. Monte Carlo simulations found that offering a brief intervention would save health care costs in 91.5% of simulated runs. If interventions were routinely offered to eligible injured adult patients nationwide, the potential net savings could approach $1.82 billion annually. Conclusions: Screening and brief intervention for alcohol problems in trauma patients is cost-effective and should be routinely implemented.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=15444378145&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=15444378145&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/01.sla.0000157133.80396.1c

DO - 10.1097/01.sla.0000157133.80396.1c

M3 - Article

VL - 241

SP - 541

EP - 550

JO - Annals of Surgery

JF - Annals of Surgery

SN - 0003-4932

IS - 4

ER -