Does the triple P-Positive Parenting Program provide value for money?
OBJECTIVE
The aim of the present study was to investigate the economic case for the implementation of the Triple P-Positive Parenting Program on a population basis in Queensland, Australia, in order to reduce the prevalence of conduct disorder in children.


METHODS
Threshold analysis was undertaken together with a limited cost-effectiveness analysis.


RESULTS
The Triple P-Positive Parenting Program is a dominant intervention; that is, it costs less than the amount it saves, until the reduction in prevalence falls below 7% where net costs become positive.


CONCLUSIONS
Triple P is likely to be a worthwhile use of limited health funds. The economic case is promising, but further research is required to confirm the study results.
Mihalopoulos
Cathrine
C
Program Evaluation Unit, School of Population Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic. 3010, Australia. c.mihalopoulos@unimelb.edu.au
Sanders
Matthew R
MR
Turner
Karen M T
KM
Murphy-Brennan
Majella
M
Carter
Rob
R
D002648:Child; D002653:Child Behavior Disorders / Q000191:economics / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D002675:Child, Preschool; D015331:Cohort Studies; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis / Q000191:economics; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D004493:Education / Q000191:economics*; D005260:Female; D006284:Health Plan Implementation / Q000191:economics*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D018803:Models, Economic; D011793:Queensland; D040841:Resource Allocation / Q000191:economics