Gesundheitsökonomische Evaluation in der psychiatrischen Versorgungsforschung

Economic evaluations and cost analyses in posttraumatic stress disorder: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Posttraumatic stress disorder is associated with a high economic burden. Costs of treatment are known to be high, and cost-effectiveness has been analysed for several treatment options.

OBJECTIVE

As no review on economic aspects of posttraumatic stress disorder exists, the aim of this study was to systematically review costs-of-illness studies and economic evaluations of therapeutic treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder, and to assess their quality.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was performed in March 2017 and was last updated in February 2020 in the databases PubMed, PsychInfo and NHS Economic Evaluation Database. Cost-of-illness studies and economic evaluations of treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder were selected. Extracted cost data were categorized as direct costs and indirect costs and inflated to 2015 US-$ purchasing power parities (PPP). Quality was assessed using an adapted cost-of-illness studies quality checklist, the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list, and the questionnaire to assess relevance and credibility of modelling studies by the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcome Research.

RESULTS

In total, 13 cost-of-illness studies and 18 economic evaluations were included in the review. Annual direct excess costs ranged from 512 US-$ PPP to 19,435 US-$ PPP and annual indirect excess costs were 5,021 US-$ PPP per person. Trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy (+selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor) was found to be cost-effective compared with treatment as usual and no treatment. Overall, included studies were of low and moderate quality. Studies used inappropriate economic study designs and lacked information on the economic perspective used.

CONCLUSIONS

Posttraumatic stress disorder is a major public health problem that causes high healthcare costs. While trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy was found to be cost-effective, further investigations regarding pharmacotherapy and other treatments are necessary.

Economic evaluation of cognitive behavioral therapy and Internet-based guided self-help for binge-eating disorder

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of individual face-to-face cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) compared to therapist guided Internet-based self-help (GSH-I) in overweight or obese adults with binge-eating disorder (BED).

METHOD

Analysis was conducted alongside the multicenter randomized controlled INTERBED trial. CBT (n = 76) consisted of up to 20 individual therapy sessions over 4 months. GSH-I (n = 71) consisted of 11 modules combining behavioral interventions, exercises including a self-monitoring food diary, psychoeducation, and 2 face-to-face coaching sessions over 4 months. Assessments at baseline, after 4 months (post-treatment), as well as 6 and 18 months after the end of treatment included health care utilization and sick leave days to calculate direct and indirect costs. Binge-free days (BFD) were calculated as effect measure based on the German version of the Eating Disorder Examination. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was determined, and net benefit regressions, adjusted for comorbidities and baseline differences, were used to derive cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

RESULTS

After controlling for baseline differences, CBT was associated with non-significantly more costs (+€2,539) and BFDs (+40.1) compared with GSH-I during the 22-month observation period, resulting in an adjusted ICER of €63 per additional BFD. CBTs probability of being cost-effective increased above 80% only if societal willingness to pay (WTP) was ≥€250 per BFD.

DISCUSSION

We did not find clear evidence for one of the treatments being more cost-effective. CBT tends to be more effective but also more costly. If the societal WTP for an additional BFD is low, then our results suggest that GSH-I should rather be adopted.

Long-term cost-effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy versus psychodynamic therapy in social anxiety disorder

BACKGROUND

To determine the cost-effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) versus psychodynamic therapy (PDT) in the treatment of social anxiety disorder after a follow-up of 30 months from a societal perspective.

METHODS

This analysis was conducted alongside the multicenter SOPHO-NET trial; adults with a primary diagnosis of social anxiety disorder received CBT (n = 209) or PDT (n = 207). Data on health care utilization and productivity loss were collected at baseline, after 6 months (posttreatment), and three further follow-ups to calculate direct and indirect costs. Anxiety-free days (AFDs) calculated based on remission and response were used as measure of effect. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was determined. Net benefit regressions, adjusted for comorbidities and baseline differences, were applied to derive cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

RESULTS

In the descriptive analysis, the unadjusted ICER favored CBT over PDT and the adjusted analysis showed that CBT's cost-effectiveness relative to PDT depends on the willingness to pay (WTP) per AFD. As baseline costs differed substantially the unadjusted estimates might be deceptive. If additional WTPs for CBT of €0, €10, and €30 were assumed, the probability of CBT being cost-effective relative to PDT was 65, 83, and 96%. Direct costs increased compared to baseline across groups, whereas indirect costs did not change significantly. Results were sensitive to considered costs.

CONCLUSIONS

If the society is willing to pay ≥€30 per additional AFD, CBT can be considered cost-effective, relative to PDT, with certainty. To further increase the cost-effectiveness more knowledge regarding predictors of treatment outcome seems essential.

Short-term cost-effectiveness of psychodynamic therapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy in social anxiety disorder: Results from the SOPHO-NET trial

BACKGROUND

To investigate the short-term cost-effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and psychodynamic therapy (PDT) compared to waiting list (WL).

METHODS

The analysis was conducted alongside the SOPHO-NET multi-center efficacy trial. Patients were randomly assigned to CBT (n=209), PDT (n=207), or WL (n=79). Resource use was assessed prior and during treatment to determine direct and absenteeism costs. Unadjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated based on remission and response rates. To visualize statistical uncertainty, cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs) were constructed based on adjusted net-benefit regression. Different values for the society׳s willingness to pay (WTP) were assumed.

RESULTS

Both interventions were more efficacious than WL but were associated with increased direct costs besides intervention costs. Unadjusted ICERs per responder were €3615 for CBT and €4958 for PDT. Unadjusted ICERs per remitted patient were €5788 and €10,733. CEACs revealed a high degree of uncertainty: applying the 97.5% probability threshold, CBT proved cost-effective at a WTP ≥€16,100 per responder and ≥€26,605 per remitted patient. Regarding PDT cost-effectiveness only was certain for response at a WTP ≥€27,290.

LIMITATIONS

The WL condition is assumed to represent untreated patients, although the expectation to start treatment in the near future probably affects symptom severity and health care utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

At the end of treatment cost-effectiveness of CBT and PDT compared to WL is uncertain and depends on the societal WTP. The interventions may induce a more adequate utilization of other health care services - involving increased costs. Development of costs and effects in the long-run should be considered.

Effectiveness and efficiency of integrated mental health care programmes in Germany: study protocol of an observational controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Since 2009 some German health insurance companies have implemented integrated mental health care services along the principles of assertive community treatment in collaboration with local mental health service providers across Germany. Focus of this study is the analysis of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this integrated care programme compared to care as usual in routine care surroundings in five regions in Germany.

METHODS

In this 18-month multi-centre observational trial 250 patients enrolled in an integrated mental health care programme and 250 patients who receive treatment as usual from five catchment areas will be included. In addition, in each group about 125 relatives of the participating patients will be included. The primary outcome criterion is the improvement of empowerment; secondary outcomes are subjective quality of life, functional impairment and costs of illness. Data will be collected at baseline and three follow-ups after 6, 12 and 18 months. Data will be analysed by means of mixed effects regression models. Propensity score methods are used for selection bias control.

DISCUSSION

Study results are expected to provide information about how integrated care programmes in their present form contribute to the improvement of mental health care. In addition, the study will provide hints to weaknesses of the current integrated care programme and options to overcome them. The major strengths of this study are the real-world character of the study intervention with a simultaneous high level of academic rigour. However, the fact that patients are not randomised to study groups and that there is no blinding might limit the study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trial Register DRKS00005111.

Economic evaluation of URMEL-ICE, a school-based overweight prevention programme comprising metabolism, exercise and lifestyle intervention in children

OBJECTIVE

Measuring the impact of the URMEL-ICE school-based overweight prevention programme on anthropometric measures in primary-school children, computing incremental cost-effectiveness relation (ICER) and net monetary benefit (NMB).

METHODS

This is an intervention study with historical control. Propensity score method is applied to account for group differences. One-year teacher-driven classroom implementation is used, which is based on especially developed teaching material including health education, physical activity breaks and parent involvement. 354 children in the control and 365 children in the intervention group at baseline and follow-up were analysed. Effectiveness is measured as cm waist circumference (WC) and unit (0.01) waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) increase prevented in intervention vs. control group using an adjusted two-level model. Standard cost-effectiveness analysis methods, net benefit regression and a societal perspective for a 1-year time horizon are applied.

RESULTS

WC gain was 1.61 cm and WHtR gain was 0.014 significantly less in intervention vs. control group. Intervention costs were euro24.09 per child. ICER was euro11.11 (95% confidence interval (CI) [8.78; 15.02]) per cm WC and euro18.55 (95% CI [14.04; 26.86]) per unit WHtR gain prevented. At a maximum willingness to pay (MWTP) of euro35, both values of the CIs for NMB regarding WC and WHtR are located in the positive range.

CONCLUSIONS

The study gives new information about the cost-effectiveness of structured health promotion embedded in daily routine at primary schools. Assuming a MWTP of euro35 the intervention is cost-effective with a positive NMB. This result may help decision makers in implementing programmes to prevent childhood overweight in school settings.