Cargando…

Is bouldering-psychotherapy a cost-effective way to treat depression when compared to group cognitive behavioral therapy – results from a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Bouldering-Psychotherapy (BPT) has proven to effectively reduce depressive symptoms, but evidence on its cost-effectiveness is lacking. Corresponding information is paramount to support health policy decision making on a potential implementation of BPT in routine care. METHODS: Using dat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schwarzkopf, Larissa, Dorscht, Lisa, Kraus, Ludwig, Luttenberger, Katharina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8549311/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34702280
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07153-1
_version_ 1784590757629263872
author Schwarzkopf, Larissa
Dorscht, Lisa
Kraus, Ludwig
Luttenberger, Katharina
author_facet Schwarzkopf, Larissa
Dorscht, Lisa
Kraus, Ludwig
Luttenberger, Katharina
author_sort Schwarzkopf, Larissa
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Bouldering-Psychotherapy (BPT) has proven to effectively reduce depressive symptoms, but evidence on its cost-effectiveness is lacking. Corresponding information is paramount to support health policy decision making on a potential implementation of BPT in routine care. METHODS: Using data from the German KuS trial BPT was compared with group Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). Severity of depression symptoms at end of the intervention was operationalized via Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Adopting a societal perspective, direct medical costs and productivity loss were calculated based on standardized unit costs. To determine incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and cost-effectiveness-acceptance curves (CEAC), adjusted mean differences (AMD) in costs (gamma-distributed model) and both effect parameters (Gaussian-distributed model) were obtained from 1000 simultaneous bootstrap replications. RESULTS: BPT was related to improved effects (AMDs: MADRS -2.58; PHQ-9: − 1.35) at higher costs (AMD: +€ 754). No AMD was significant. ICERs amounted to €288 per MADRS-point and €550 per PHQ-9-point. For both effect parameters about 20% of bootstrap replications indicated dominance of BPT, and about 75% larger effects at higher costs. At hypothetical willingness to pay (WTP) thresholds of €241 (MADRS) and €615 (PHQ-9) per unit of change BPT had a 50% probability of being cost-effective. CONCLUSION: BPT is a promising alternate treatment strategy which – in absence of established WTP thresholds for improving symptoms of depression – cannot unambiguously be claimed cost-effective. Further studies defining subgroups that particularly benefit from BPT appear paramount to delineate recommendations for an efficient prospective roll-out to routine care. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-07153-1.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8549311
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85493112021-10-27 Is bouldering-psychotherapy a cost-effective way to treat depression when compared to group cognitive behavioral therapy – results from a randomized controlled trial Schwarzkopf, Larissa Dorscht, Lisa Kraus, Ludwig Luttenberger, Katharina BMC Health Serv Res Research BACKGROUND: Bouldering-Psychotherapy (BPT) has proven to effectively reduce depressive symptoms, but evidence on its cost-effectiveness is lacking. Corresponding information is paramount to support health policy decision making on a potential implementation of BPT in routine care. METHODS: Using data from the German KuS trial BPT was compared with group Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). Severity of depression symptoms at end of the intervention was operationalized via Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Adopting a societal perspective, direct medical costs and productivity loss were calculated based on standardized unit costs. To determine incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and cost-effectiveness-acceptance curves (CEAC), adjusted mean differences (AMD) in costs (gamma-distributed model) and both effect parameters (Gaussian-distributed model) were obtained from 1000 simultaneous bootstrap replications. RESULTS: BPT was related to improved effects (AMDs: MADRS -2.58; PHQ-9: − 1.35) at higher costs (AMD: +€ 754). No AMD was significant. ICERs amounted to €288 per MADRS-point and €550 per PHQ-9-point. For both effect parameters about 20% of bootstrap replications indicated dominance of BPT, and about 75% larger effects at higher costs. At hypothetical willingness to pay (WTP) thresholds of €241 (MADRS) and €615 (PHQ-9) per unit of change BPT had a 50% probability of being cost-effective. CONCLUSION: BPT is a promising alternate treatment strategy which – in absence of established WTP thresholds for improving symptoms of depression – cannot unambiguously be claimed cost-effective. Further studies defining subgroups that particularly benefit from BPT appear paramount to delineate recommendations for an efficient prospective roll-out to routine care. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-07153-1. BioMed Central 2021-10-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8549311/ /pubmed/34702280 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07153-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Schwarzkopf, Larissa
Dorscht, Lisa
Kraus, Ludwig
Luttenberger, Katharina
Is bouldering-psychotherapy a cost-effective way to treat depression when compared to group cognitive behavioral therapy – results from a randomized controlled trial
title Is bouldering-psychotherapy a cost-effective way to treat depression when compared to group cognitive behavioral therapy – results from a randomized controlled trial
title_full Is bouldering-psychotherapy a cost-effective way to treat depression when compared to group cognitive behavioral therapy – results from a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Is bouldering-psychotherapy a cost-effective way to treat depression when compared to group cognitive behavioral therapy – results from a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Is bouldering-psychotherapy a cost-effective way to treat depression when compared to group cognitive behavioral therapy – results from a randomized controlled trial
title_short Is bouldering-psychotherapy a cost-effective way to treat depression when compared to group cognitive behavioral therapy – results from a randomized controlled trial
title_sort is bouldering-psychotherapy a cost-effective way to treat depression when compared to group cognitive behavioral therapy – results from a randomized controlled trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8549311/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34702280
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07153-1
work_keys_str_mv AT schwarzkopflarissa isboulderingpsychotherapyacosteffectivewaytotreatdepressionwhencomparedtogroupcognitivebehavioraltherapyresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT dorschtlisa isboulderingpsychotherapyacosteffectivewaytotreatdepressionwhencomparedtogroupcognitivebehavioraltherapyresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT krausludwig isboulderingpsychotherapyacosteffectivewaytotreatdepressionwhencomparedtogroupcognitivebehavioraltherapyresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT luttenbergerkatharina isboulderingpsychotherapyacosteffectivewaytotreatdepressionwhencomparedtogroupcognitivebehavioraltherapyresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial