Cost-effectiveness and long-term follow-up of three forms of minimal-contact cognitive behaviour therapy for severe health anxiety: Results from a randomised controlled trial

The global economic burden of health anxiety/hypochondriasis- a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have shown a lifetime prevalence of 5.7% for health anxiety/hypochondriasis resulting in increased healthcare service utilisation and disability as consequences. To the best of our knowledge, there has been no systematic review examining the global costs of hypochondriasis, encompassing both direct and indirect costs. Our objective was to synthesize the available evidence on the economic burden of health anxiety and hypochondriasis to identify research gaps and provide guidance and insights for policymakers and future research.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, PsycInfo, EconLit, IBSS and Google Scholar without any time limit, up until April 2022. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed in this search and the following article selection process. The included studies were systematically analysed and summarized using a predefined data extraction sheet.

RESULTS

Of the 3044 articles identified; 10 publications met our inclusion criteria. The results displayed significant variance in the overall costs listed among the studies. The reported economic burden of hypochondriasis ranged from 857.19 to 21137.55 US$ per capita per year. Most of the investigated costs were direct costs, whereas the assessment of indirect costs was strongly underrepresented.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review suggests that existing studies underestimate the costs of hypochondriasis due to missing information on indirect costs. Furthermore, there is no uniform data collection of the costs and definition of the disease, so that the few existing data are not comparable and difficult to evaluate. There is a need for standardised data collection and definition of hypochondriasis in future studies to identify major cost drivers as potential target point for interventions.

Effect of Cognitive Behavioral Intervention Combined with the Resilience Model to Decrease Depression and Anxiety Symptoms and Increase the Quality of Life in ESRD Patients Treated with Hemodialysis

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of cognitive behavioral intervention (CBI) combined with the resilience model (CBI + R) vs CBI alone on depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and quality of life of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients undergoing hemodialysis replacement therapy.

METHOD

Fifty-three subjects were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups. The control group (n = 25) was provided with treatment strategies based on a cognitive behavioral approach, while the experimental group (n = 28) were given the same techniques plus resilience model strategies. Five psychological instruments were applied: Beck Depression Inventory, Beck Anxiety Inventory, Mexican Resilience Scale, cognitive distortions scale, and the Kidney Disease related Quality of Life questionnaire. Participants were assessed at baseline (before treatment), eight weeks later (end of treatment), and four weeks after the end of treatment (follow up). The results were analyzed by ANOVA for repeated measures with a Bonferroni-adjusted test method, with p < 0.05 considered significant.

RESULTS

The experimental group had significant differences in total and somatic depression as well as differences in the dimensions of cognitive distortions and a significant increase in the dimensions of resilience. The control group had significant differences in all variables but showed lower scores in the evaluated times.

CONCLUSIONS

The resilience model strengthens and enhances the effectiveness of the cognitive behavioral approach to reduce symptoms of depression and anxiety in patients with ESRD.

Cost-effectiveness of internet-delivered cognitive behaviour therapy for body dysmorphic disorder: Results from a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of internet-delivered cognitive behaviour therapy for body dysmorphic disorder (BDD-NET).

DESIGN

Secondary cost-effectiveness analysis from a randomised controlled trial on BDD-NET versus online supportive psychotherapy.

SETTING

Academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

Self-referred adult participants with a primary diagnosis of body dysmorphic disorder and a score of 20 or higher on the modified Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale for BDD (n = 94). Patients receiving concurrent psychotropic drug treatment were included if the dose had been stable for at least two months.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants received either BDD-NET (n = 47) or online supportive psychotherapy (n = 47) for 12 weeks.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measures were cost-effectiveness and cost-utility from a societal perspective, using remission status from a diagnostic interview and quality-adjusted life years (QALY), respectively. Secondary outcome measures were cost-effectiveness and cost-utility from a health care perspective and the clinic's perspective.

RESULTS

Compared to supportive psychotherapy, BDD-NET produced one additional remission for an average societal cost of $4132. The cost-utility analysis showed that BDD-NET generated one QALY to an average cost of $14,319 from a societal perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

BDD-NET is a cost-effective treatment for body dysmorphic disorder, compared to online supportive psychotherapy. The efficacy and cost-effectiveness of BDD-NET should next be directly compared to in-person cognitive behaviour therapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02010619.

Cost Effectiveness of Internet-Delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Patients with Severe Health Anxiety: A Randomised Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Health anxiety is a prevalent and debilitating disorder associated with extensive use of healthcare services and reduced quality of life (QoL). Regional variability in specialised clinics or specialist healthcare providers limits access to evidence-based treatment, which may be overcome by internet-delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (iACT).

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated the cost effectiveness of iACT for severe health anxiety in adults.

METHODS

Based on a Danish randomised controlled trial (March 2016-March 2017), the economic evaluation compared costs and effects between iACT and an active control condition (iFORUM). Effectiveness was measured using self-report questionnaires. The cost analysis applied a societal perspective. Resource use and healthcare costs were extracted from the Danish National Registries. Linear regression analysis was applied using change in costs/effectiveness outcomes as the dependant variable. Time, group, and interaction between time and group were independent variables. The primary outcome was the proportion of clinically significant improvements, defined as a ≥ 25% reduction in two measures of health anxiety. The probability of cost effectiveness was presented in a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve for a range of threshold values for willingness to pay.

RESULTS

No significant differences were detected in healthcare costs between groups; however, the iACT group significantly improved in all effectiveness outcomes. The economic analysis showed that, from the healthcare perspective, iACT was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €33 per additional case of clinically significant improvement compared with iFORUM and that, from the societal perspective, iACT dominated iFORUM because it was more effective and less expensive.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no statistically significant differences in costs between groups; however, iACT for severe health anxiety may be cost effective, as evidenced by significant differences in effect.

TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER

Clinicaltrials.gov, no. NCT02735434.

Digital interventions in mental health: evidence syntheses and economic modelling

BACKGROUND

Economic evaluations provide evidence on whether or not digital interventions offer value for money, based on their costs and outcomes relative to the costs and outcomes of alternatives.

OBJECTIVES

(1) Evaluate and summarise published economic studies about digital interventions across different technologies, therapies, comparators and mental health conditions; (2) synthesise clinical evidence about digital interventions for an exemplar mental health condition; (3) construct an economic model for the same exemplar mental health condition using the previously synthesised clinical evidence; and (4) consult with stakeholders about how they understand and assess the value of digital interventions.

METHODS

We completed four work packages: (1) a systematic review and quality assessment of economic studies about digital interventions; (2) a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials on digital interventions for generalised anxiety disorder; (3) an economic model and value-of-information analysis on digital interventions for generalised anxiety disorder; and (4) a series of knowledge exchange face-to-face and digital seminars with stakeholders.

RESULTS

In work package 1, we reviewed 76 economic evaluations: 11 economic models and 65 within-trial analyses. Although the results of the studies are not directly comparable because they used different methods, the overall picture suggests that digital interventions are likely to be cost-effective, compared with no intervention and non-therapeutic controls, whereas the value of digital interventions compared with face-to-face therapy or printed manuals is unclear. In work package 2, we carried out two network meta-analyses of 20 randomised controlled trials of digital interventions for generalised anxiety disorder with a total of 2350 participants. The results were used to inform our economic model, but when considered on their own they were inconclusive because of the very wide confidence intervals. In work package 3, our decision-analytic model found that digital interventions for generalised anxiety disorder were associated with lower net monetary benefit than medication and face-to-face therapy, but greater net monetary benefit than non-therapeutic controls and no intervention. Value for money was driven by clinical outcomes rather than by intervention costs, and a value-of-information analysis suggested that uncertainty in the treatment effect had the greatest value (£12.9B). In work package 4, stakeholders identified several areas of benefits and costs of digital interventions that are important to them, including safety, sustainability and reducing waiting times. Four factors may influence their decisions to use digital interventions, other than costs and outcomes: increasing patient choice, reaching underserved populations, enabling continuous care and accepting the 'inevitability of going digital'.

LIMITATIONS

There was substantial uncertainty around effect estimates of digital interventions compared with alternatives. This uncertainty was driven by the small number of studies informing most comparisons, the small samples in some of these studies and the studies' high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital interventions may offer good value for money as an alternative to 'doing nothing' or 'doing something non-therapeutic' (e.g. monitoring or having a general discussion), but their added value compared with medication, face-to-face therapy and printed manuals is uncertain. Clinical outcomes rather than intervention costs drive 'value for money'.

FUTURE WORK

There is a need to develop digital interventions that are more effective, rather than just cheaper, than their alternatives.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018105837.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 1. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Economic Evaluations of Internet-Based Psychological Interventions for Anxiety Disorders and Depression: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Internet-based interventions show clinical effectiveness for treating anxiety disorders and depression and could make mental healthcare more affordable.

METHODS

We searched databases including PubMed; EMBASE; Cochrane Central; PsychINFO; CINAHL; EconLit; and Web of Science from January 1, 2000 to August 21, 2020. Inclusion criteria were: 1) pertained to the treatment or prevention of anxiety disorders or depression; 2) evaluated the use of an internet-delivered psychological intervention; 3) recruited participants; and 4) reported costs or cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

Of the 6,069 articles identified, 33 targeted anxiety (N=13) and depression (n=20) and met final inclusion criteria. All studies were from high-income countries. The control conditions and cost components included were heterogeneous. Only eight studies reported costs of developing the intervention. Of 27 studies that made a conclusion about cost-effectiveness, 81% of interventions were cost-effective. The quality of studies included was high based on a quality assessment checklist of economic evaluations, although many studies did not include definitions of cost components or differentiate between patient-side and system-level costs.

LIMITATIONS

Studies varied in methodology, making conclusions about cost-effectiveness difficult. The generalizability of these results is unclear as studies were clustered in a small number of high-income countries and costs vary over time and between regions.

CONCLUSIONS

Internet-delivered interventions appeared to be cost-effective although control conditions and cost component reporting were variable. We propose a checklist of cost components for future cost analyses to better compare intervention costs. More research is needed to describe development costs, cost-effectiveness in low-resource settings, and cost-effectiveness of newer technologies.

Systematic Review and Critique of Methods for Economic Evaluation of Digital Mental Health Interventions

OBJECTIVES

Investment in digital interventions for mental health conditions is growing rapidly, offering the potential to elevate systems that are currently overstretched. Despite a growing literature on economic evaluation of digital mental health interventions (DMHIs), including several systematic reviews, there is no conclusive evidence regarding their cost-effectiveness. This paper reviews the methodology used to determine their cost-effectiveness and assesses whether this meets the requirements for decision-making. In doing so we consider the challenges specific to the economic evaluation of DMHIs, and identify where consensus and possible further research is warranted.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify all economic evaluations of DMHIs published between 1997 and December 2018. The searches included databases of published and unpublished research, reference lists and citations of all included studies, forward citations on all identified protocols and conference abstracts, and contacting authors researchers in the field. The identified studies were critiqued against a published set of requirements for decision-making in healthcare, identifying methodological challenges and areas where consensus is required.

RESULTS

The review identified 67 papers evaluating DMHIs. The majority of the evaluations were conducted alongside trials, failing to capture all relevant available evidence and comparators, and long-term impact of mental health disorders. The identified interventions are complex and heterogeneous. As a result, there are a number of challenges specific to their evaluation, including estimation of all costs and outcomes, conditional on analysis viewpoint, and identification of relevant comparators. A taxonomy for DMHIs may be required to inform what interventions can reasonably be pooled and compared.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the first attempt to understand the appropriateness of the methodologies used to evaluate the value for money of DMHIs, helping work towards consensus and methods' harmonisation on these complex interventions.

Mediators of treatment effect in minimal-contact cognitive behaviour therapy for severe health anxiety: A theory-driven analysis based on a randomised controlled trial

Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) is efficacious for severe health anxiety, but little is known about mechanisms. We analysed putative mediators of change based on 13 weekly assessments in a randomised controlled trial (N = 132) of exposure-based minimal-contact CBT (guided Internet-delivered CBT, unguided Internet-delivered CBT and bibliotherapy) vs. a waitlist control for severe health anxiety. We hypothesised that the effect of CBT on health anxiety would be mediated by non-reactivity to inner experiences, health anxiety behaviours and perceived competence. We also explored somatosensory amplification. In parallel process growth models, non-reactivity, health anxiety behaviours and perceived competence - but not somatosensory amplification - were influenced by CBT and associated with health anxiety. Random intercepts cross-lagged panel models were used to study within-individual ordering of change. None of the putative mediators systematically predicted subsequent changes in health anxiety. Rather, changes in health anxiety predicted subsequent changes in all putative mediators. In summary, CBT influenced health anxiety behaviours, non-reactivity to inner experiences and perceived competence, and these variables were associated with the outcome. However, their role as mediators was not corroborated because we found no evidence that changes in these variables predicted subsequent changes in health anxiety. We encourage further research into mediators of CBT for health anxiety.

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapist-Guided Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Stress-Related Disorders: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Stress-related disorders are associated with significant suffering, functional impairment, and high societal costs. Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (ICBT) is a promising treatment for stress-related disorders but has so far not been subjected to health economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of ICBT for patients with stress-related disorders in the form of adjustment disorder (AD) or exhaustion disorder (ED). We hypothesized that ICBT, compared with a waitlist control (WLC) group, would generate improvements at low net costs, thereby making it cost-effective.

METHODS

Health economic data were obtained in tandem with a randomized controlled trial of a 12-week ICBT in which patients (N=100) were randomized to an ICBT (n=50) or a WLC (n=50) group. Health outcomes and costs were surveyed pre- and posttreatment. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) based on remission rates and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs) based on health-related quality of life. Bootstrap sampling was used to assess the uncertainty of our results.

RESULTS

The ICER indicated that the most likely scenario was that ICBT led to higher remission rates compared with the WLC and was associated with slightly larger reductions in costs from pre- to posttreatment. ICBT had a 60% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness to pay (WTP) of US $0 and a 96% probability of being cost-effective at a WTP of US $1000. The ICUR indicated that ICBT also led to improvements in quality of life at no net societal cost. Sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of our results.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that ICBT is a cost-effective treatment for patients suffering from AD or ED. Compared with no treatment, ICBT for these patients yields large effects at no or minimal societal net costs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02540317; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02540317.

Psychosocial Health Interventions by Social Robots: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Social robots that can communicate and interact with people offer exciting opportunities for improved health care access and outcomes. However, evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on health or well-being outcomes has not yet been clearly synthesized across all health domains where social robots have been tested.

Objective

This study aimed to undertake a systematic review examining current evidence from RCTs on the effects of psychosocial interventions by social robots on health or well-being.

Methods

Medline, PsycInfo, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Engineering Village searches across all years in the English language were conducted and supplemented by forward and backward searches. The included papers reported RCTs that assessed changes in health or well-being from interactions with a social robot across at least 2 measurement occasions.

Results

Out of 408 extracted records, 27 trials met the inclusion criteria: 6 in child health or well-being, 9 in children with autism spectrum disorder, and 12 with older adults. No trials on adolescents, young adults, or other problem areas were identified, and no studies had interventions where robots spontaneously modified verbal responses based on speech by participants. Most trials were small (total N=5 to 415; median=34), only 6 (22%) reported any follow-up outcomes (2 to 12 weeks; median=3.5) and a single-blind assessment was reported in 8 (31%). More recent trials tended to have greater methodological quality. All papers reported some positive outcomes from robotic interventions, although most trials had some measures that showed no difference or favored alternate treatments.

Conclusions

Controlled research on social robots is at an early stage, as is the current range of their applications to health care. Research on social robot interventions in clinical and health settings needs to transition from exploratory investigations to include large-scale controlled trials with sophisticated methodology, to increase confidence in their efficacy.

Clinical and economic outcomes of remotely delivered cognitive behaviour therapy versus treatment as usual for repeat unscheduled care users with severe health anxiety: a multicentre randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

It is challenging to engage repeat users of unscheduled healthcare with severe health anxiety in psychological help and high service costs are incurred. We investigated whether clinical and economic outcomes were improved by offering remote cognitive behaviour therapy (RCBT) using videoconferencing or telephone compared to treatment as usual (TAU).

METHODS

A single-blind, parallel group, multicentre randomised controlled trial was undertaken in primary and general hospital care. Participants were aged ≥18 years with ≥2 unscheduled healthcare contacts within 12 months and scored >18 on the Health Anxiety Inventory. Randomisation to RCBT or TAU was stratified by site, with allocation conveyed to a trial administrator, research assessors masked to outcome. Data were collected at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. The primary outcome was change in HAI score from baseline to six months on an intention-to-treat basis. Secondary outcomes were generalised anxiety, depression, physical symptoms, function and overall health. Health economics analysis was conducted from a health service and societal perspective.

RESULTS

Of the 524 patients who were referred and assessed for trial eligibility, 470 were eligible and 156 (33%) were recruited; 78 were randomised to TAU and 78 to RCBT. Compared to TAU, RCBT significantly reduced health anxiety at six months, maintained to 9 and 12 months (mean change difference HAI -2.81; 95% CI -5.11 to -0.50; P = 0.017). Generalised anxiety, depression and overall health was significantly improved at 12 months, but there was no significant change in physical symptoms or function. RCBT was strictly dominant with a net monetary benefit of £3,164 per participant at a willingness to pay threshold of £30,000. No treatment-related adverse events were reported in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

RCBT may reduce health anxiety, general anxiety and depression and improve overall health, with considerable reductions in health and informal care costs in repeat users of unscheduled care with severe health anxiety who have previously been difficult to engage in psychological treatment. RCBT may be an easy-to-implement intervention to improve clinical outcome and save costs in one group of repeat users of unscheduled care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on 19 Nov 2014 with reference number NCT02298036.