ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Psychiatry
Sec. Public Mental Health
Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1623610
Evaluation of Treatment Costs for Direct versus Stepwise Admission to Home Treatment
Provisionally accepted- 1Psychiatric Services Aargau, Windisch, Switzerland
- 2Department of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry and Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland
- 3hepp-health gmbh, Zürich, Switzerland
- 4Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Basel University, Basel, Switzerland
- 5Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Marburg University, Marburg, Germany
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background: Mental health care's rising socio-economic relevance has led to a need for cost-effective treatment alternatives. Home Treatment (HT) has emerged as a viable substitute for inpatient psychiatric care, introduced by the Psychiatric Services Aarau AG (PDAG) in 2015. Subsequent studies have evaluated its impact on hospital bed usage and treatment costs. This study aimed to assess the long-term effects of HT after its full integration into routine psychiatric care. Methods: An observational study included patients who received HT between 2019 and 2020. They were followed for two years, comparing cumulative costs, treatment duration, and readmission rates with a matched inpatient control group. Subgroup analyses distinguished between patients directly admitted to HT and those transitioning from inpatient care. Statistical analyses included Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and Fisher's exact tests. Results: HT patients had fewer inpatient days but longer total treatment durations; costs did not differ significantly. However, analyses revealed that direct admission to HT was linked to a 24% cost reduction and a lower readmission rate compared to inpatient care. In contrast, combining inpatient care with HT led to increased treatment durations and costs. Conclusion: HT as a standalone treatment showed cost efficiency and reduced readmission rates, positioning it as a promising alternative to inpatient care. However, combining HT with inpatient treatment increased duration and costs, undermining the financial benefits. Future research should identify patient groups that benefit most from direct HT admission and explore hybrid models integrating short-term inpatient interventions followed by HT to enhance cost-effectiveness and clinical outcomes.
Keywords: Home Treatment, Cost-Effectiveness, Psychiatric services, Inpatient care, Health Economics
Received: 06 May 2025; Accepted: 18 Aug 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Kählitz, Dang, Kronschnabel, Pichler, Hepp, Walter and Zavorotnyy. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Maxim Zavorotnyy, Psychiatric Services Aargau, Windisch, Switzerland
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.