Cost implications of specific and non‐specific treatment for young persons at ultra high risk of developing a first episode of psychosis

AIM: Costs associated with mental health treatment for young persons at 'ultra' high risk (UHR) of developing a psychotic disorder have not previously been reported. This paper reports cost implications of providing psychological and pharmacological intervention for individuals at UHR for psychosis compared with minimal psychological treatment. METHOD: Mental health service costs associated with a randomized controlled trial of two treatments (Specific Preventive Intervention: SPI and Needs-Based Intervention: NBI) for UHR young persons were estimated and compared at three time points: treatment phase, short-term follow up and medium-term follow up. RESULTS: Although the SPI group incurred significantly higher treatment costs than the NBI group over the treatment phase, they incurred significantly lower outpatient treatment costs over the longer term. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that specific interventions designed to treat young persons who are identified as being at UHR of psychosis might be associated with some cost savings compared with non-specific interventions.