Cargando…

A supported self-help for recurrent depression in primary care; An economic evaluation alongside a multi-center randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Major depression is a prevalent mental disorder with a high risk of relapse or recurrence. Only few studies have focused on the cost-effectiveness of interventions aimed at the prevention of relapse or recurrence of depression in primary care. AIM: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Biesheuvel-Leliefeld, Karolien E. M., Bosmans, Judith E., Dijkstra-Kersten, Sandra M. A., Smit, Filip, Bockting, Claudi L. H., van Schaik, Digna J. F., van Marwijk, Harm W. J., van der Horst, Henriette E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6300246/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30566441
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208570
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Major depression is a prevalent mental disorder with a high risk of relapse or recurrence. Only few studies have focused on the cost-effectiveness of interventions aimed at the prevention of relapse or recurrence of depression in primary care. AIM: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a supported Self-help Preventive Cognitive Therapy (S-PCT) added to treatment-as-usual (TAU) compared with TAU alone for patients with a history of depression, currently in remission. METHODS: An economic evaluation alongside a multi-center randomised controlled trial was performed (n = 248) over a 12-month follow-up. Outcomes included relapse or recurrence of depression and quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs) based on the EuroQol-5D. Analyses were performed from both a societal and healthcare perspective. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputations. Uncertainty was estimated using bootstrapping and presented using the cost-effectiveness plane and the Cost-Effectiveness Acceptability Curve (CEAC). Cost estimates were adjusted for baseline costs. RESULTS: S-PCT statistically significantly decreased relapse or recurrence by 15% (95%CI 3;28) compared to TAU. Mean total societal costs were €2,114 higher (95%CI -112;4261). From a societal perspective, the ICER for relapse or recurrence was 13,515. At a Willingness To Pay (WTP) of 22,000 €/recurrence prevented, the probability that S-PCT is cost-effective, in comparison with TAU, is 80%. The ICER for QALYs was 63,051. The CEA curve indicated that at a WTP of 30,000 €/QALY gained, the probability that S-PCT is cost-effective compared to TAU is 21%. CONCLUSIONS: Though ultimately depending on the WTP of decision makers, we expect that for both relapse or recurrence and QALYs, S-PCT cannot be considered cost-effective compared to TAU.