Authors :
David Labiner, MD – University of Arizona
Presenting Author: Suja Rajan, PhD. – UTHealth School of Public Health
Refugio Sepulveda, PhD – University of Arizona
Ross Shegog, PhD – UTHealth Houston School of Public Health
Robert Addy, PhD. – UTHealth Houston
Katarzyna Czerniak, MLA, MPH, PhD – UTHealth Houston School of Public Health
Myrka Torres, MD – University of Arizona
Rationale:
Epilepsy is a chronic neurological disorder that imposes significant financial and healthcare burdens on individuals and society. Effective epilepsy self-management (ESM) strategies can improve health outcomes, reduce seizure frequency, and lower healthcare costs. This study explores the economic impact of MINDSET, a CDC Managing Epilepsy Well (MEW) ESM intervention, assessing its cost-effectiveness and potential savings for healthcare systems. Programs to improve ESM (e.g., seizure, medication, and lifestyle management) through varied modalities (e.g., in-person, digital) can reduce emergency visits, hospitalizations, and lost productivity. Cost-benefit analyses suggest that while initial investments in ESM programs may be required, long-term savings and improved quality of life justify these expenditures. To facilitate the dissemination of evidence-based interventions across health systems, it is very important to ensure the systems adopting them are
financially prepared to invest in the adoption, and stakeholders understand the
value of the intervention. Therefore, appropriate economic evaluations are necessary for determining the resources required for financial preparedness and the subsequent value addition due to the program.
Methods:
An assessment of MINDSET (Management Information Decision Support Epilepsy Tool) implementation costs and cost-effectiveness will be conducted in community and clinical health care settings using retrospective and prospective data to facilitate financial preparedness for new organizations wanting to implement MINDSET. An economic analysis survey instrument was developed through key informant interviews and through collaboration with the MEW Network members (Dartmouth, Emory, NYU, Univ. AZ, and UTHealth Houston). Results:
The economic analysis interview for trainers and implementers comprises 6 items designed to capture information on costs associated with MINDSET intervention development, provider/patient recruitment, training, implementation, and healthcare utilization. Perceived value measurement items are being developed for patient input.Conclusions:
This project is significant in providing data for decision-makers regarding the economic feasibility of implementing an ESM evidence-based program (MINDSET) in clinic and community settings. This information is vital to enable dissemination and implementation of ESM EBPs and contributes to guidance on MINDSET implementation that includes reimbursement coding and billing recommendations. The project is innovative in drawing longitudinal data (retrospective and prospective) from diverse settings (community and clinical health care) to enable CEA. To date, there has been a dearth of research on CEA for epilepsy treatment programs, particularly those devoted to ESM. If successful, this project will provide evidence for the implementation and economic value for the sustainability of MINDSET and establish an immediately scalable implementation model for community and clinical health care settings.Funding:
This research was funded by a Special Interest Project Grant (SIP24–008) from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention