Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-z2ts4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-06T23:37:16.044Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Measuring costs of community mental health care in Italy: A prevalence-based study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

F. Senese
Affiliation:
aRegional Agency for Health and Social Care, Bologna, Italy
P. Rucci*
Affiliation:
bDepartment of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum University, Bologna, Italy
M.P. Fantini
Affiliation:
bDepartment of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum University, Bologna, Italy
D. Gibertoni
Affiliation:
bDepartment of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum University, Bologna, Italy
E. Semrov
Affiliation:
cDepartment of Mental Health and Pathological Dependences, Reggio Emilia, Italy
M. Nassisi
Affiliation:
cDepartment of Mental Health and Pathological Dependences, Reggio Emilia, Italy
R. Messina
Affiliation:
bDepartment of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum University, Bologna, Italy
C. Travaglini
Affiliation:
dDepartment of Management, Alma Mater Studiorum University, Bologna, Italy
*
*Corresponding author at: Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, Unit of Hygiene, Public Health and Biostatistics, Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, Via San Giacomo 12, 40126 Bologna, Italy. E-mail address: paola.rucci2@unibo.it

Abstract

Background:

Information on individual mental healthcare costs and utilization patterns in Italy is scant. We analysed the use and the annual costs of community mental health services (MHS) in an Italian local health authority (LHA). Our aims are to compare the characteristics of patients in the top decile of costs with those of the remaining 90%, and to investigate the demographic and clinical determinants of costs.

Methods:

This retrospective study is based on administrative data of adult patients with at least one contact with MHS in 2013. Costs of services were estimated using a microcosting method. We defined as high cost (HC) those patients whose community mental health services costs place them in the top decile of the cost distribution. The predictors of costs were investigated using multiple linear regression.

Results:

The overall costs borne for 7601 patients were 17 million €, with HC accounting for 87% of costs and 73% of services. Compared with the rest of the patients, HC were younger, more likely to be male, to have a diagnosis of psychosis, and longer and more intensive MHS utilization. In multiple linear regression, younger age, longer duration of contact with MHS, psychosis, bipolar disorder, personality disorder, depression, dementia and Italian citizenship accounted for 20.7% of cost variance.

Conclusion:

Direct mental health costs are concentrated among a small fraction of patients who receive intensive socio-rehabilitation in community services. One limitation includes the unavailability of hospital costs. Our methodology is replicable and useful for national and cross-national benchmarking.

Information

Type
Original article
Copyright
Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 2018
Figure 0

Table 1 Mental health unit services: skill-mix, venue and average length of service weights.

Health workers: MD = medical doctor, N = nurse, PSY = psychologist, RT = Rehab. Technician, SA = Social assistant, OSS-OTA = and Ot = Other health and social profile, GP = general practitioner.Venues: MHC = mental health center, DC = Day care center, Com = Community, LHA = Other LHA departments and services, HOME = Home, H = hospital acute or emergency.Weight: multiplies the length of service provided in a secondary/tertiary venue and divides by average number of participants (2.8) in group activity the time effort for group activities (1:2.8 = 0.36).
Figure 1

Table 2 Gross hourly average labor cost by main qualification of health workers in the selected LHA, year 2013.

*1 Medical doctor and 1 Psychologist FTE = 1983.6 and any other 1 heath professional FTE = 1915.2 h.
Figure 2

Table 3 Patient characteristics (N = 7601).

Figure 3

Table 4 MH services unit costs in 2013: key descriptive statistics.

Figure 4

Table 5 Frequency of MH ‘pathways’ and costs per beneficiary in 2013.

Figure 5

Fig. 1. Diagram showing the distribution of annual costs and services among patients treated at the MH-PDD in 2013.High cost (HC): annual costs >€ 1520; non-high costs (non-HU): annual costs≤ € 1520. HC accounted for 87% of costs and 73% of services.

Figure 6

Fig. 2. Stacked bar chart showing the percentage distribution of cost by pathway in the top 10% (HC) and in the rest of the sample (non-HC).High cost (HC): > € 1520; non-HC:≤ € 1520.

Figure 7

Table 6 Linear regression estimates of (log) costs by MH users characteristics (N = 7061). The adjusted R2 for the model is 0.207.

Supplementary material: File

Senese et al. supplementary material

Senese et al. supplementary material
Download Senese et al. supplementary material(File)
File 24.3 KB
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.