Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis of internet-mediated cognitive behavioural therapy for depression in the primary care setting: results based on a controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomised controlled trial of internet-mediated cognitive behavioural therapy (ICBT) compared with treatment as usual (TaU) for patients with mild to moderate depression in the Swedish primary care setting. In particular, the objective was to assess from a healthcare and societal perspective the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of ICBT versus TaU at 12 months follow-up.

Design

A cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a pragmatic effectiveness trial.

Setting

Sixteen primary care centres (PCCs) in south-west Sweden.

Participants

Ninety patients diagnosed with mild to moderate depression at the PCCs.

Main outcome measure

ICERs calculated as (Cost_ICBT-Cost_TaU)/(Health outcome_ICBT-Health outcome_TaU)=?Cost/?Health outcomes, the health outcomes being changes in the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) score and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

Results

The total cost per patient for ICBT was 4044 Swedish kronor (SEK) (€426) (healthcare perspective) and SEK47?679 (€5028) (societal perspective). The total cost per patient for TaU was SEK4434 (€468) and SEK50?343 (€5308). In both groups, the largest cost was associated with productivity loss. The differences in cost per patient were not statistically significant. The mean reduction in BDI-II score was 13.4 and 13.8 units in the ICBT and TaU groups, respectively. The mean QALYs per patient was 0.74 and 0.79 in the ICBT and TaU groups, respectively. The differences in BDI-II score reduction and mean QALYs were not statistically significant. The uncertainty of the study estimates when assessed by bootstrapping indicated that no firm conclusion could be drawn as to whether ICBT treatment compared with TaU was the most cost-effective use of resources.

Conclusions

ICBT was regarded to be as cost-effective as TaU as costs, health outcomes and cost-effectiveness were similar for ICBT and TaU, both from a healthcare and societal perspective.

Trial registration number

ID NR 30511.

SUBMITTER: Holst A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6009451 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness analysis of internet-mediated cognitive behavioural therapy for depression in the primary care setting: results based on a controlled trial.

Holst Anna A Björkelund Cecilia C Metsini Alexandra A Madsen Jens-Henrik JH Hange Dominique D Petersson Eva-Lisa L EL Eriksson Maria Cm MC Kivi Marie M Andersson Per-Åke Å PÅ Svensson Mikael M

BMJ open 20180614 6

<h4>Objective</h4>To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomised controlled trial of internet-mediated cognitive behavioural therapy (ICBT) compared with treatment as usual (TaU) for patients with mild to moderate depression in the Swedish primary care setting. In particular, the objective was to assess from a healthcare and societal perspective the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of ICBT versus TaU at 12 months follow-up.<h4>Design</h4>A cost-effectiveness analysis alongsi ...[more]

PMID: 29903785

Similar Datasets

Project description:Despite the availability of evidence-based treatments for depression, a large proportion of patients remains untreated or adequate treatment is initiated with delay. This situation is particularly critical in primary care, where not only most individuals first seek help for their mental health problems, but also depressive disorders - particularly mild to moderate levels of severity - are highly prevalent given the high comorbidity of chronic somatic conditions and depression. Improving the access for evidence-based treatment, especially in primary care, is hence a priority challenge in the mental health care agenda. Telephone usage is widespread and has the potential of overcoming many barriers that individuals suffering from mental health problems are facing: Its implementation for treatment delivery presents an option for optimisation of treatment pathways and outcomes.This paper details the study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the effectiveness of a telephone-administered short-term cognitive-behavioural therapy (T-CBT) for depression as compared to treatment as usual (TAU) in the Swiss primary care setting. The study aims at randomising a total of 216 mildly to moderately depressed patients, which are either identified by their General Practitioners (GPs) or who self-refer to the study programme in consultation with their GP. The trial will examine whether telephone-delivered, manualised treatment leads to clinically significant reduction in depression at follow-up. It will further investigate the cost-effectiveness and acceptability of the intervention in the primary care setting.Conducting a low-intensity treatment on the telephone allows for greater flexibility for both patient and therapist, can grant more anonymity and can thus lead to less hesitation in the patient about whether to attempt treatment or not. In order to benefit from this approach, large-scale studies need to prove superior effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of telephone-delivered therapy over routine care for patients with mild to moderate depression.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02667366 . Registered on 3 December 2015.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess whether exposure-based internet-delivered cognitive-behavioural therapy (internet-CBT) is a cost-effective treatment for adolescents with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) compared with a waitlist control, from a societal perspective, based on data from a randomised trial. DESIGN:Within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING:Participants were recruited from the whole of Sweden via primary, secondary and tertiary care clinics reached through news media and advertising. PARTICIPANTS:Adolescents (aged 13-17) with a diagnosis of IBS. INTERVENTIONS:Participants were randomised to either an exposure-based internet-CBT, including 10 weekly modules for adolescents and five modules for parents, or a waitlist. OUTCOME MEASURES:The main health outcome was the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) estimated by mapping Pediatric Quality-of-Life Inventory (PedsQL) scores onto EQ-5D-3L utilities. The secondary outcome was the point improvement on the PedsQL scale. Data on health outcomes and resource use were collected at baseline and 10 weeks post-treatment. Resource use was measured using the Trimbos and Institute of Medical Technology Assessment Cost Questionnaire for Psychiatry (TIC-P) . Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated as the difference in average costs by the difference in average outcomes between groups. RESULTS:The base-case results showed that internet-CBT costs were on average US$170.24 (95% CI 63.14 to 315.04) more per participant than the waitlist. Adolescents in the internet-CBT group showed small QALY gains (0.0031; 95% CI 0.0003 to 0.0061), and an average improvement of 5.647 points (95% CI 1.82 to 9.46) on the PedsQL compared with the waitlist. Internet-CBT yielded an ICER of $54 916/QALY gained and a probability of cost-effectiveness of 74% given the Swedish willingness-to-pay threshold. The ICER for the outcome PedsQL was US$85.29/point improvement. CONCLUSIONS:Offering internet-CBT to adolescents with IBS improves health-related quality of life and generates small QALY gains at a higher cost than a waitlist control. Internet-CBT is thus likely to be cost-effective given the strong efficacy evidence, small QALY gains and low cost. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02306369; Results.

Project description:BackgroundMajor depressive disorder is a chronic condition; its prevalence is expected to grow with the aging trend of high-income countries. Internet-based cognitive-behavioral therapy has proven efficacy in treating major depressive disorder.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of implementing a community internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy intervention (Super@, the Spanish program for the MasterMind project) for treating major depressive disorder.MethodsThe cost-effectiveness of the Super@ program was assessed with the Monitoring and Assessment Framework for the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing tool, using a 3-state Markov model. Data from the cost and effectiveness of the intervention were prospectively collected from the implementation of the program by a health care provider in Badalona, Spain; the corresponding data for usual care were gathered from the literature. The health states, transition probabilities, and utilities were computed using Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores.ResultsThe analysis was performed using data from 229 participants using the Super@ program. Results showed that the intervention was more costly than usual care; the discounted (3%) and nondiscounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were €29,367 and €26,484 per quality-adjusted life-year, respectively (approximately US $35,299 and $31,833, respectively). The intervention was cost-effective based on the €30,000 willingness-to-pay threshold typically applied in Spain (equivalent to approximately $36,060). According to the deterministic sensitivity analyses, the potential reduction of costs associated with intervention scale-up would reduce the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the intervention, although it remained more costly than usual care. A discount in the incremental effects up to 5% exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000.ConclusionsThe Super@ program, an internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy intervention for treating major depressive disorder, cost more than treatment as usual. Nevertheless, its implementation in Spain would be cost-effective from health care and societal perspectives, given the willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000 compared with treatment as usual.

Project description:ObjectivesInternet-delivered exposure-based cognitive behaviour therapy (ICBT) has been shown to be effective in the treatment of severe health anxiety. The health economic effects of the treatment have, however, been insufficiently studied and no prior study has investigated the effect of ICBT compared with an active psychological treatment. The aim of the present study was to investigate the cost effectiveness of ICBT compared with internet-delivered behavioural stress management (IBSM) for adults with severe health anxiety defined as Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) hypochondriasis. ICBT was hypothesised to be the more cost-effective treatment.SettingThis was a cost-effectiveness study within the context of a randomised controlled trial conducted in a primary care/university setting. Participants from all of Sweden could apply to participate.ParticipantsSelf-referred adults (N=158) with a principal diagnosis of DSM-IV hypochondriasis, of whom 151 (96%) provided baseline and post-treatment data.InterventionsICBT or IBSM for 12 weeks.Primary and secondary measuresThe primary outcome was the Health Anxiety Inventory. The secondary outcome was the EQ-5D. Other secondary measures were used in the main outcome study but were not relevant for the present health economic analysis.ResultsBoth treatments led to significant reductions in gross total costs, costs of healthcare visits, direct non-medical costs and costs of domestic work cutback (p=0.000-0.035). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) indicated that the cost of one additional case of clinically significant improvement in ICBT compared with IBSM was $2214. The cost-utility ICER, that is, the cost of one additional quality-adjusted life year, was estimated to be $10,000.ConclusionsICBT is a cost-effective treatment compared with IBSM and treatment costs are offset by societal net cost reductions in a short time. A cost-benefit analysis speaks for ICBT to play an important role in increasing access to effective treatment for severe health anxiety.Trial registration numberNCT01673035; Results.

Project description:BackgroundMost evidence on the effect of collaborative care for depression is derived in the selective environment of randomised controlled trials. In collaborative care, practice nurses may act as case managers. The Primary Care Services Improvement Project (PCSIP) aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of alternative models of practice nurse involvement in a real world Australian setting. Previous analyses have demonstrated the value of high level practice nurse involvement in the management of diabetes and obesity. This paper reports on their value in the management of depression.MethodsGeneral practices were assigned to a low or high model of care based on observed levels of practice nurse involvement in clinical-based activities for the management of depression (i.e. percentage of depression patients seen, percentage of consultation time spent on clinical-based activities). Linked, routinely collected data was used to determine patient level depression outcomes (proportion of depression-free days) and health service usage costs. Standardised depression assessment tools were not routinely used, therefore a classification framework to determine the patient's depressive state was developed using proxy measures (e.g. symptoms, medications, referrals, hospitalisations and suicide attempts). Regression analyses of costs and depression outcomes were conducted, using propensity weighting to control for potential confounders.ResultsCapacity to determine depressive state using the classification framework was dependent upon the level of detail provided in medical records. While antidepressant medication prescriptions were a strong indicator of depressive state, they could not be relied upon as the sole measure. Propensity score weighted analyses of total depression-related costs and depression outcomes, found that the high level model of care cost more (95% CI: -$314.76 to $584) and resulted in 5% less depression-free days (95% CI: -0.15 to 0.05), compared to the low level model. However, this result was highly uncertain, as shown by the confidence intervals.ConclusionsClassification of patients' depressive state was feasible, but time consuming, using the classification framework proposed. Further validation of the framework is required. Unlike the analyses of diabetes and obesity management, no significant differences in the proportion of depression-free days or health service costs were found between the alternative levels of practice nurse involvement.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Internet-based cognitive-behavioral therapy for bulimia nervosa (CBT-BN) compared to face-to-face delivery of CBT-BN.MethodsThis study is a planned secondary analysis of data from a randomized clinical trial. Participants were 179 adults (98% female, mean age = 28 years) meeting DSM-IV criteria for bulimia nervosa who were randomized to group face-to-face or group Internet-based CBT-BN for 16 sessions during 20 weeks. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from a third-party payor perspective, and a partial societal perspective analysis was conducted to investigate cost-utility (ie, cost per gain in quality-adjusted life-years) and patient out-of-pocket travel-related costs. Net health care costs were calculated from protocol and nonprotocol health care services using third-party payor cost estimates. The primary outcome measure in the clinical trial was abstinence from binge eating and purging, and the trial start and end dates were 2008 and 2016.ResultsThe mean cost per abstinent patient at posttreatment was $7,757 (95% confidence limit [CL], $4,515, $13,361) for face-to-face and $11,870 (95% CL, $6,486, $22,188) for Internet-based CBT-BN, and at 1-year follow-up was $16,777 (95% CL, $10,298, $27,042) for face-to-face and $14,561 (95% CL, $10,165, $21,028) for Internet-based CBT-BN. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment arms in cost-effectiveness or cost-utility at posttreatment or 1-year follow-up. Out-of-pocket patient costs were significantly higher for face-to-face (mean [95% CL] = $178 [$127, $140]) than Internet-based ($50 [$50, $50]) therapy.ConclusionsThird-party payor cost-effectiveness of Internet-based CBT-BN is comparable with that of an accepted standard. Internet-based dissemination of CBT-BN may be a viable alternative for patients geographically distant from specialist eating disorder services who have an unmet need for treatment.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00877786.

Project description:ImportanceYouth anxiety and depression are common and undertreated. Pediatric transdiagnostic interventions for anxiety and/or depression may be associated with improved access to treatment among youths.ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a pediatric transdiagnostic brief behavioral therapy (BBT) program for anxiety and/or depression compared with assisted referral to community outpatient mental health care (ARC).Design, setting, and participantsIn this economic evaluation, an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the societal perspective using data from a randomized clinical trial of youths with full or probable diagnoses of anxiety or depression who were recruited from pediatric clinics in San Diego, California, and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The trial was conducted from October 6, 2010, through December 5, 2014, and this analysis was performed from January 1, 2019, through October 20, 2020.InterventionsIn the randomized clinical trial, youths were randomized to BBT (n = 95) or ARC (n = 90). The BBT program consisted of 8 to 12 weekly 45-minute sessions of behavioral therapy delivered in pediatric clinics by master's-level therapists. Families randomized to ARC received personalized referrals to mental health care and telephone calls to support access to care.Main outcomes and measuresAnxiety-free days, depression-free days, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and costs based on incremental cost-effectiveness ratios from intake through 32-week follow-up. A cost-effectiveness acceptability curve for QALYs was used to assess the probability that BBT was cost-effective compared with ARC over a range of amounts that a decision-maker might be willing to pay for an additional outcome.ResultsEnrolled patients included 185 youths (mean [SD] age, 11.3 [2.6] years; 107 [57.8%] female; 144 [77.8%] White; and 38 [20.7%] Hispanic). Youths who received BBT experienced significantly more anxiety-free days (difference, 28.63 days; 95% CI, 5.86-50.71 days; P = .01) and QALYs (difference, 0.026; 95% CI, 0.009-0.046; P = .007) compared with youths who received ARC. Youths who received BBT experienced more depression-free days than did youths who received ARC (difference, 10.52 days; 95% CI, -4.50 to 25.76 days; P = .18), but the difference was not statistically significant. The mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was -$41 414 per QALY (95% CI, -$220 601 to $11 468). The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve analysis indicated that, at a recommended willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 per QALY, the probability that BBT would be cost-effective compared with ARC at 32 weeks was 95.6%.Conclusions and relevanceIn this economic evaluation, BBT in primary care was significantly associated with better outcomes and a greater probability of cost-effectiveness at 32 weeks compared with ARC. The findings suggest that transdiagnostic BBT may be associated with improved youth anxiety and functioning at a reasonable cost.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis of internet-mediated cognitive behavioural therapy for depression in the primary care setting: results based on a controlled trial.

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Main outcome measure

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration number

Publications

Cost-effectiveness analysis of internet-mediated cognitive behavioural therapy for depression in the primary care setting: results based on a controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets