CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 30Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHealthcare Policy and Management

The return on investment of postdischarge follow-up calls for suicidal ideation or deliberate self-harm.

Richardson, John S., Mark, Tami L., McKeon, Richard·2014·Psychiatric Services
DOI 10.1176/appi.ps.201300196
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Transitions of care are critical for individuals at risk of suicide. This study determined the return on investment (ROI) for providing postdischarge follow-up calls to patients at risk of suicide who are discharged from a hospital or an emergency department. METHODS: Claims data were from the 2006-2011 Truven Health MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database and Multi-State Medicaid Database. Cost estimates were from eight call centers that provide postdischarge follow-up calls. The ROI was estimated for the 30 days after discharge and was calculated from a payer's perspective (return gained for every $1 invested). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to examine the influence of variations of ROI model inputs. RESULTS: Under base case assumptions, the estimated ROI was $1.76 for commercial insurance and $2.43 for Medicaid for patients discharged from a hospital and $1.70 for commercial insurance and $2.05 for Medicaid for those discharged from an emergency department. Variation in the effect size of postdischarge contacts on reducing readmission had the largest effect on the ROI, producing a range from $0 to $4.11. The ROI would be greater than $1 for both payers and across both discharge settings as long as postdischarge contact could reduce readmission by at least 13.3%. Sensitivity analyses indicated a 77% probability (commercial) and an 88% probability (Medicaid) that the ROI would be greater than $1 among hospital discharges; the probabilities among emergency department discharges were 74% (commercial) and 82% (Medicaid). CONCLUSIONS: The study supports the business case for payers, particularly Medicaid, to invest in postdischarge follow-up calls.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/appi.ps.201300196

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Richardson, J. S., Mark, T. L., & McKeon, R.
Affiliations
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (US)
ORCID
Mark, Tami L.
Venue
Psychiatric Services
Publisher
American Psychiatric Association Publishing
Published
2014-08
Volume
65
Issue
8
Pages
1012-1019
ISSN
  • 0022-1597 (ISSN-L)
  • 1075-2730
  • 1557-9700
DOI
10.1176/appi.ps.201300196
OpenAlex
W2149912403
Cited by
30
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
FWCI
3.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychiatric Services (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
Keywords
return on investment, suicide risk, suicidal ideation, self-harm, care transitions, hospital readmission, emergency department discharge, Medicaid, private insurance, payer perspective, cost-effectiveness
MeSH terms
Continuity of Patient Care, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Humans, Medicaid, Patient Discharge, United States, Self-Injurious Behavior, Health Care Costs, Suicidal Ideation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review