Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of Internet-Delivered vs In-Person Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Children and Adolescents With Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Therapist-guided, internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy is an effective treatment option for children and adolescents with obsessive-compulsive disorder, but to our knowledge, its cost-effectiveness compared with traditional in-person treatment has not been established.

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of guided internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy implemented within a stepped-care model compared with in-person cognitive behavioral therapy for young people with obsessive-compulsive disorder.

Design, setting, and participants

This economic evaluation of a randomized noninferiority trial conducted at 2 specialist obsessive-compulsive disorder clinics in Sweden enrolled 152 children and adolescents aged 8 to 17 years with obsessive-compulsive disorder, mainly through clinician referrals (110 [72%]). Recruitment began October 6, 2017, and ended May 24, 2019. Follow-up ended April 14, 2020.

Interventions

Participants were randomly assigned to receive either guided internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy or in-person cognitive behavioral therapy during a 16-week period. At the 3-month follow-up, nonresponders in both groups were offered additional in-person cognitive behavior therapy sessions.

Main outcomes and measures

Health outcomes were treatment response rates (primary outcome), remission rates, and quality-adjusted life-years. Cost data were collected before treatment, after treatment, at 3-month follow-up, and at 6-month follow-up (primary end point) and are presented in 2020 US dollars. The differences in incremental costs and health outcomes were compared between the groups and presented from the health care professional, health care sector, and societal perspectives.

Results

A total of 152 participants (94 girls [62%]; mean [SD] age, 13.4 [2.5] years) were randomized; 151 (99%) completed the trial. At the 6-month follow-up, 50 of 74 participants (68%) in the stepped-care group and 52 of 77 participants (68%) in the in-person cognitive behavioral therapy group were classified as treatment responders (odds ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.51-1.98]; P = .99). Health economic analyses showed that the stepped-care group used fewer therapist resources than the in-person cognitive behavioral therapy group, resulting in a mean cost savings of $2104 (95% CI, $1202-$3006) per participant for the full study period of 10 months, corresponding to a relative savings of 39%. The cost savings remained largely comparable when taking wider health care sector and societal perspectives.

Conclusions and relevance

This study suggests that, for young people with obsessive-compulsive disorder, a low-cost digital intervention followed by in-person treatment for nonresponders was cost-effective compared with in-person cognitive behavior therapy alone.

SUBMITTER: Aspvall K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8325072 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceIn most countries, young people with obsessive-compulsive disorder have limited access to specialist cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), a first-line treatment.ObjectiveTo investigate whether internet-delivered CBT implemented in a stepped-care model is noninferior to in-person CBT for pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder.Design, setting and participantsA randomized clinical noninferiority trial conducted at 2 specialist child and adolescent mental health clinics in Sweden. Participants included 152 individuals aged 8 to 17 years with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Enrollment began in October 2017 and ended in May 2019. Follow-up ended in April 2020.InterventionsParticipants randomized to the stepped-care group (n = 74) received internet-delivered CBT for 16 weeks. Nonresponders at the 3-month follow-up were then offered a course of traditional face-to-face treatment. Participants randomized to the control group (n = 78) immediately received in-person CBT for 16 weeks. Nonresponders at the 3-month follow-up received additional face-to-face treatment.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the masked assessor-rated Children's Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS) score at the 6-month follow-up. The scale includes 10 items rated from 0 (no symptoms) to 4 (extreme symptoms), yielding a total score range of 0 to 40, with higher scores indicating greater severity. Assessors were masked to treatment allocation at pretreatment, posttreatment, 3-month follow-up, and 6-month follow-up assessments. The predefined noninferiority margin was 4 points on the CY-BOCS.ResultsAmong the 152 randomized participants (mean age, 13.4 years; 94 [62%] females), 151 (99%) completed the trial. At the 3-month follow-up, 34 participants (46%) in the stepped-care group and 23 (30%) in the in-person CBT group were nonresponders. At the 6-month follow-up, the CY-BOCS score was 11.57 points in the stepped-care group vs 10.57 points in the face-to-face treatment group, corresponding to an estimated mean difference of 0.91 points ([1-sided 97.5% CI, -∞ to 3.28]; P for noninferiority = .02). Increased anxiety (30%-36%) and depressive symptoms (20%-28%) were the most frequently reported adverse events in both groups. There were 2 unrelated serious adverse events (1 in each group).Conclusions and relevanceAmong children and adolescents with obsessive-compulsive disorder, treatment with an internet-delivered CBT program followed by in-person CBT if necessary compared with in-person CBT alone resulted in a noninferior difference in symptoms at the 6-month follow-up. Further research is needed to understand the durability and generalizability of these findings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03263546.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a therapist-guided internet-delivered cognitive behaviour therapy (ICBT) intervention for adolescents with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) compared with untreated patients on a waitlist. DESIGN:Single-blinded randomised controlled trial. SETTING:A research clinic within the regular child and adolescent mental health service in Stockholm, Sweden. PARTICIPANTS:Sixty-seven adolescents (12-17?years) with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth Edition diagnosis of OCD. INTERVENTIONS:Either a 12-week, therapist-guided ICBT intervention or a wait list condition of equal duration. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Cost data were collected at baseline and after treatment, including healthcare use, supportive resources, prescription drugs, prescription-free drugs, school absence and productivity loss, as well as the cost of ICBT. Health outcomes were defined as treatment responder rate and quality-adjusted life years gain. Bootstrapped mixed model analyses were conducted comparing incremental costs and health outcomes between the groups from the societal and healthcare perspectives. RESULTS:Compared with waitlist control, ICBT generated substantial societal cost savings averaging US$-144.98 (95%?CI -159.79 to -130.16) per patient. The cost reductions were mainly driven by reduced healthcare use in the ICBT group. From the societal perspective, the probability of ICBT being cost saving compared with waitlist control was approximately 60%. From the healthcare perspective, the cost per additional responder to ICBT compared with waitlist control was approximately US$78. CONCLUSIONS:The results suggest that therapist-guided ICBT is a cost-effective treatment and results in societal cost savings, compared with patients who do not receive evidence-based treatment. Since, at present, most patients with OCD do not have access to evidence-based treatments, the results have important implications for the increasingly strained national and healthcare budgets. Future studies should compare the cost-effectiveness of ICBT with regular face-to-face CBT. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02191631.

Project description:BackgroundTelephone cognitive-behaviour therapy (TCBT) may be a cost-effective method for improving access to evidence-based treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in young people.AimsEconomic evaluation of TCBT compared with face-to-face CBT for OCD in young people.MethodRandomised non-inferiority trial comparing TCBT with face-to-face CBT for 72 young people (aged 11 to 18) with a diagnosis of OCD. Cost-effectiveness at 12-month follow-up was explored in terms of the primary clinical outcome (Children's Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale, CY-BOCS) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (trial registration: ISRCTN27070832).ResultsTotal health and social care costs were higher for face-to-face CBT (mean total cost £2965, s.d. = £1548) than TCBT (mean total cost £2475, s.d. = £1024) but this difference was non-significant (P = 0.118). There were no significant between-group differences in QALYs or the CY-BOCS and there was strong evidence to support the clinical non-inferiority of TCBT. Cost-effectiveness analysis suggests a 74% probability that face-to-face CBT is cost-effective compared with TCBT in terms of QALYs, but the result was less clear in terms of CY-BOCS, with TCBT being the preferred option at low levels of willingness to pay and the probability of either intervention being cost-effective at higher levels of willingness to pay being around 50%.ConclusionsAlthough cost-effectiveness of TCBT was sensitive to the outcome measure used, TCBT should be considered a clinically non-inferior alternative when access to standard clinic-based CBT is limited, or when patient preference is expressed.Declaration of interestD.M.-C. reports research grants from the Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsrådet), the Swedish Research Council for Health, working life and welfare (Forte), the US National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), the UK National Institute of Health Research (NIHR), as well as royalties from Wolters Kluwer Health and Elsevier, all unrelated to the submitted work.

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:Few studies have evaluated the implementation of ICBT in regular child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS). This study aimed to explore the acceptability, feasibility, and effectiveness of ICBT for children and adolescents with anxiety disorders and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) within a rural CAMHS. The study also explored outcome predictors and long-term outcomes. Eighty-three participants were consecutively recruited from a non-specialized CAMHS in Region Jämtland Härjedalen in northern Sweden. Therapist-guided ICBT was offered during 12 weeks to children aged 8-17 with an anxiety disorder or OCD. Acceptability and feasibility measures included treatment adherence, treatment satisfaction, and adverse events. The primary outcome measure was the Clinical Global Impression-Severity. Secondary measures of effectiveness included clinician-, self-, and parent-ratings of symptom severity and functional impairment. Assessments were completed at baseline, post-treatment, and three-month follow-up (primary endpoint). A two-year follow up was conducted using medical records. Potential predictors included both patient characteristics and treatment variables. Results indicated that ICBT was both acceptable and feasible according to study measures. Statistically significant improvements were found from baseline to the three-month follow-up on clinician rated severity (B [SE] = -0.92 [0.09]; p < .001), as well as on all secondary measures. Forty-three percent of participants no longer fulfilled criteria for their principal disorder at the three-month follow-up. No serious adverse events were reported. Clinical improvement was highest among children with higher functioning at baseline (B [SE] = -0.05 [0.02]; p < .05). Forty-six percent of participants had been in contact with CAMHS during the two-year follow-up period, mainly for reasons other than their initial diagnosis. Findings suggest that ICBT could be an acceptable and feasible treatment option for young people with anxiety disorders and OCD in rural non-specialized CAMHS settings. Further studies are needed to confirm treatment effectiveness in this setting. Trial registration: NCT02926365.

Project description:ImportanceSocial anxiety disorder (SAD) is a prevalent childhood-onset disorder associated with lifelong adversity and high costs for the individual and society at large. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is an established evidence-based treatment for SAD, but its availability is limited.ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of therapist-guided internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy (ICBT) for SAD in youths vs an active comparator, internet-delivered supportive therapy (ISUPPORT).Design, setting, and participantsThis single-masked, superiority randomized clinical trial enrolled participants at a clinical research unit integrated within the child and adolescent mental health services in Stockholm, Sweden, from September 1, 2017, to October 31, 2018. The final participant reached the 3-month follow-up (primary end point) in May 2019. Children and adolescents 10 to 17 years of age with a principal diagnosis of SAD and their parents were included in the study.InterventionsICBT and ISUPPORT, both including 10 online modules, 5 separate parental modules, and 3 video call sessions with a therapist.Main outcomes and measuresThe Clinician Severity Rating (CSR), derived from the Anxiety Disorder Interview Schedule, rated by masked assessors 3 months after the end of treatment. The CSR ranges from 0 to 8, with scores of 4 or higher indicating caseness. Secondary outcomes included masked assessor-rated diagnostic status of SAD and global functioning, child- and parent-reported social anxiety and depressive symptoms, and health-related costs.ResultsOf the 307 youths assessed for eligibility, 103 were randomized to 10 weeks of therapist-guided ICBT (n = 51) or therapist-guided ISUPPORT (n = 52) for SAD. The sample consisted of 103 youths (mean [SD] age, 14.1 [2.1] years; 79 [77%] female). Internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy was significantly more efficacious than ISUPPORT in reducing the severity of SAD symptoms. Mean (SD) CSR scores for ICBT at baseline and at the 3-month follow-up were 5.06 (0.95) and 3.96 (1.46), respectively, compared with 4.94 (0.94) and 4.48 (1.30) for ISUPPORT. There was a significant between-group effect size of d = 0.67 (95% CI, 0.21-1.12) at the 3-month follow-up. Similarly, all of the secondary outcome measures demonstrated significant differences with small to large effect sizes, except for child-rated quality of life (nonsignificant). The cost-effectiveness analyses indicated cost savings associated with ICBT compared with ISUPPORT, with the main drivers of the savings being lower medication costs (z = 2.38, P = .02) and increased school productivity (z = 1.99, P = .047) in the ICBT group. There was 1 suicide attempt in the ISUPPORT group; no other serious adverse events occurred in either group.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial, internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy was an efficacious and cost-effective intervention for children and adolescents with SAD. Implementation in clinical practice could markedly increase the availability of effective interventions for SAD.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03247075.