scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of Improving Primary Care Treatment of Late-Life Depression

2005 ◽  
Vol 62 (12) ◽  
pp. 1313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wayne J. Katon
2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (10) ◽  
pp. 1171-1180
Author(s):  
Tze Pin Ng ◽  
Ma S. Z. Nyunt ◽  
Liang Feng ◽  
Rajeev Kumar ◽  
Calvin S. L. Fones ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 ◽  
pp. 10-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Grochtdreis ◽  
Christian Brettschneider ◽  
Frederike Bjerregaard ◽  
Christiane Bleich ◽  
Sigrid Boczor ◽  
...  

AbstractBackground:Late-life depression is a highly prevalent disorder that causes a large economic burden. A stepped collaborative care program was set up in order to improve care for patients with late-life depression in primary care in Germany: GermanIMPACT is the adaption of the Improving Mood-Promoting Access to Collaborative Treatment (IMPACT) program that has already been established in primary care in the USA. The aim of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of GermanIMPACT compared with treatment as usual from a societal perspective.Methods:This study is part of a 12-month bi-centric cluster-randomized controlled trial aiming to assess the effectiveness of GermanIMPACT compared with treatment as usual among patients with late-life depression. A cost-effectiveness analysis using depression-free days (DFDs) was performed. Net-monetary benefit (NMB) regressions adjusted for baseline differences for different willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds were conducted and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were constructed.Results:In total, n = 246 patients (intervention group: n = 139; control group: n = 107) with a mean age of 71 from 71 primary care practices were included in the analysis. After 12 months, adjusted mean differences in costs and DFDs between intervention group and control group were +€354 and +21.4, respectively. Only the difference in DFDs was significant (p = 0.022). According to the unadjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, GermanIMPACT was dominant compared with treatment as usual. The probability of GermanIMPACT being cost-effective was 80%, 90% or 95% if societal WTP per DFD was ≥€70, ≥€110 or ≥€180, respectively.Conclusion:Evidence for cost-effectiveness of GermanIMPACT relative to treatment as usual is not clear. Only if societal WTP was ≥€180 for an additional DFD, GermanIMPACT could be considered cost-effective with certainty.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1420300
Author(s):  
Amit Dias ◽  
Fredric Azariah ◽  
Miriam Sequeira ◽  
Revathi Krishna ◽  
Jennifer Q. Morse ◽  
...  

2002 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 134-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah Banazak Wagenaar ◽  
Maureen A. Mickus ◽  
Kris A. Gaumer ◽  
Christopher C. Colenda

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S876-S877
Author(s):  
Shiyu Lu ◽  
Gloria H Y Wong ◽  
Terry Lum ◽  
Tianyin Liu

Abstract Late-life depression is a burden on society because it is costly and have a significant adverse effect on the quality of life. The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the collaborative stepped care intervention for depression among community-dwelling older adults compared to care as usual from a societal perspective. The intervention was piloted from 2016-2019 in Hong Kong. The study used a two-armed quasi-experimental design. Eventually, 412 older people were included (314 collaborative stepped care, 98 care as usual). Baseline measures and 12-month follow-up measures were assessed using questionnaires. We applied the 5-level EQ-5D version (EQ-5D-5L) and the Client Service Receipt Inventory (CSRI) respectively measuring quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and health care utilization. The average annual direct medical cost in the intervention group was USD 6,589 (95% C.I., 4,979 to 8,199) compared to US$ 6,167 (95% C.I., 3,702 to 8,631) in the care as usual group. The average QALYs gained was 0.036 higher in the collaborative stepped care group, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$ 11,722 per QALY, lower than the cost-effectiveness threshold suggested by The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The study showed that collaborative stepped care was a cost-effective intervention for late-life depression over service as usual.


2005 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 533-538 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hari Subramaniam ◽  
Alex J. Mitchell

Depression in late life is extremely common. Of those aged 65 years or older, 2–5% have syndromal depression, but up to 20% of elderly people have depressive symptoms (Horwath et al., 2002). Both syndromal and subsyndromal depression carry a high risk of long-term complications and both are associated with elevated risks of morbidity and mortality (Penninx et al., 1999). Despite repeated alerts, depression is consistently under-recognized in acute medical settings, in nursing homes and in primary care (Volkers et al., 2004). For reasons that are inadequately understood, late-life depression seems to be under-treated to an even greater extent than depression in mid-life (Mackenzie et al., 1999). This issue is particularly important, given that effective and safe treatments for depression are available (Bartels et al., 2003), even though the evidence regarding maintenance therapies in older people is inconsistent (Geddes et al., 2003; Wilson et al., 2003). Recent evidence suggests that a package of care can improve the care of older depressed patients in primary care settings (Bruce et al., 2004) and in nursing homes (Ciechanowski et al., 2004). This has led to the development of several clinical guidelines specifically for late-life depression (Baldwin et al., 2003; Charney et al., 2003; Lebowitzet al., 1997). Yet, in the recent National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines for the management of depression in primary and secondary care, no distinction was made between early, middle and late-life depression (Malone and Mitchell, 2005).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document