scholarly journals Modelling the cost-effectiveness of pharmacotherapy compared with cognitive–behavioural therapy and combination therapy for the treatment of moderate to severe depression in the UK

2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (14) ◽  
pp. 3019-3031 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Koeser ◽  
V. Donisi ◽  
D. P. Goldberg ◽  
P. McCrone
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Combination Treatment ◽  
Severe Depression ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Effective Treatment Option ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
The Cost

Background.The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England and Wales recommends the combination of pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy for the treatment of moderate to severe depression. However, the cost-effectiveness analysis on which these recommendations are based has not included psychotherapy as monotherapy as a potential option. For this reason, we aimed to update, augment and refine the existing economic evaluation.Method.We constructed a decision analytic model with a 27-month time horizon. We compared pharmacotherapy with cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) and combination treatment for moderate to severe depression in secondary care from a healthcare service perspective. We reviewed the literature to identify relevant evidence and, where possible, synthesized evidence from clinical trials in a meta-analysis to inform model parameters.Results.The model suggested that CBT as monotherapy was most likely to be the most cost-effective treatment option above a threshold of £22 000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). It dominated combination treatment and had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £20 039 per QALY compared with pharmacotherapy. There was significant decision uncertainty in the probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses.Conclusions.Contrary to previous NICE guidance, the results indicated that even for those patients for whom pharmacotherapy is acceptable, CBT as monotherapy may be a cost-effective treatment option. However, this conclusion was based on a limited evidence base, particularly for combination treatment. In addition, this evidence cannot easily be transferred to a primary care setting.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of computerized cognitive–behavioural therapy for the treatment of depression in primary care: findings from the Randomised Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Acceptability of Computerised Therapy (REEACT) trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (10) ◽  
pp. 1825-1835 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Duarte ◽  
S. Walker ◽  
E. Littlewood ◽  
S. Brabyn ◽  
C. Hewitt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Scenario Analyses ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Gp Care ◽  
The Cost

BackgroundComputerized cognitive–behavioural therapy (cCBT) forms a core component of stepped psychological care for depression. Existing evidence for cCBT has been informed by developer-led trials. This is the first study based on a large independent pragmatic trial to assess the cost-effectiveness of cCBT as an adjunct to usual general practitioner (GP) care compared with usual GP care alone and to establish the differential cost-effectiveness of a free-to-use cCBT programme (MoodGYM) in comparison with a commercial programme (Beating the Blues) in primary care.MethodCosts were estimated from a healthcare perspective and outcomes measured using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over 2 years. The incremental cost-effectiveness of each cCBT programme was compared with usual GP care. Uncertainty was estimated using probabilistic sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses were performed to assess the robustness of results.ResultsNeither cCBT programme was found to be cost-effective compared with usual GP care alone. At a £20 000 per QALY threshold, usual GP care alone had the highest probability of being cost-effective (0.55) followed by MoodGYM (0.42) and Beating the Blues (0.04). Usual GP care alone was also the cost-effective intervention in the majority of scenario analyses. However, the magnitude of the differences in costs and QALYs between all groups appeared minor (and non-significant).ConclusionsTechnically supported cCBT programmes do not appear any more cost-effective than usual GP care alone. No cost-effective advantage of the commercially developed cCBT programme was evident compared with the free-to-use cCBT programme. Current UK practice recommendations for cCBT may need to be reconsidered in the light of the results.

scholarly journals ANALISIS EFEKTIVITAS BIAYA PASIEN PNEUMONIA BALITA RAWAT INAP DI RUMAH SAKIT BHAYANGKARA MANADO

PHARMACON ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 968
Author(s):  
Monica D. Lestari ◽  
Gayatri Citraningtyas ◽  
Hosea Jaya Edi
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
Retrospective Data Collection ◽  
Keywords Antibiotics ◽  
The Cost

ABSTRACTPneumonia is an infectious disease in the lower respiratory tract that affects the lung tissue. Ceftriaxone and Gentamicin antibiotics are the most numerous and good for use in the treatment of pneumonia, but of the two antibiotics is not yet known the options for more cost effective treatment, so it needs to be done the cost effectiveness analysis in order to facilitate the selection of more cost-effective treatment options especially in toddler. This study aims to determine which therapies are more cost-effective than the use of antibiotics Ceftriaxone and Gentamicin in pneumonia patients in the January-December 2018 period in the Bhayangkara Manado Hospital using descriptive research methods with retrospective data collection. The sample in this study were 22 patients, 12 patients using ceftriaxone antibiotics and 10 patients using gentamicin antibiotics. The results showed that pneumonia treatment in infants using Ceftriaxone antibiotics was more cost-effective with ACER ceftriaxone value of Rp. 503,872 / day and ICER value of Rp. 145,588 / day. Keywords : Antibiotics, CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis), Pharmacoeconomy, Toddler Pneumonia. ABSTRAKPneumonia merupakan penyakit infeksi pada saluran pernapasan bagian bawah yang mengenai jaringan paru. Antibiotik Seftriakson dan Gentamisim yang paling banyak dan baik untuk digunakan dalam pengobatan pneumonia, namun dari kedua antibiotik tersebut belum diketahui pilihan terapi yang lebih cost-effective, sehingga perlu dilakukan analisis efektivitas biaya agar dapat mempermudah dalam pemilihan alternatif pengobatan yang lebih cost-effective khususnya pada balita. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menentukan terapi yang lebih cost-effective dari penggunaan antibiotik Seftriakson dan Gentamisin pada pasien pneumonia rawat inap periode Januari-Desember 2018 di Rumah Sakit Bhayangkara Manado dengan menggunakan metode penelitian deskriptif dengan pengambilan data secara retrospektif. Sampel pada penelitian ini sebanyak 22 pasien yaitu 12 pasien menggunakan antibiotik Seftriakson dan 10 pasien menggunakan antibiotik Gentamisin. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan pengobatan pneumonia pada balita menggunakan antibiotik Seftriakson lebih cost-effective dengan nilai ACER seftriakson sebesar Rp. 503,872/hari dan nilai ICER sebesar Rp. 145.588/hari. Kata Kunci : Pneumonia Balita, Antibiotik, CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis), Farmakoekonomi

Cost-Effectiveness of Cognitive–Behavioural Therapy and Drug Interventions for Major Depression

2005 ◽  
Vol 39 (8) ◽  
pp. 683-692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theo Vos ◽  
Justine Corry ◽  
Michelle M. Haby ◽  
Rob Carter ◽  
Gavin Andrews
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Major Depression ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
Disability Adjusted Life ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Disability Adjusted Life Year

Objective: Antidepressant drugs and cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) are effective treatment options for depression and are recommended by clinical practice guidelines. As part of the Assessing Cost-effectiveness – Mental Health project we evaluate the available evidence on costs and benefits of CBT and drugs in the episodic and maintenance treatment of major depression. Method: The cost-effectiveness is modelled from a health-care perspective as the cost per disability-adjusted life year. Interventions are targeted at people with major depression who currently seek care but receive non-evidence based treatment. Uncertainty in model inputs is tested using Monte Carlo simulation methods. Results: All interventions for major depression examined have a favourable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio under Australian health service conditions. Bibliotherapy, group CBT, individual CBT by a psychologist on a public salary and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) are very cost-effective treatment options falling below $A10 000 per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) even when taking the upper limit of the uncertainty interval into account. Maintenance treatment with selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs) is the most expensive option (ranging from $A17 000 to $A20 000 per DALY) but still well below $A50 000, which is considered the affordable threshold. Conclusions: A range of cost-effective interventions for episodes of major depression exists and is currently underutilized. Maintenance treatment strategies are required to significantly reduce the burden of depression, but the cost of long-term drug treatment for the large number of depressed people is high if SSRIs are the drug of choice. Key policy issues with regard to expanded provision of CBT concern the availability of suitably trained providers and the funding mechanisms for therapy in primary care.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of antibiotic treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infection in women: a comparison of four antibiotics

BJGP Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. bjgpopen17X101097
Author(s):  
Susannah Sadler ◽  
Michael Holmes ◽  
Shijie Ren ◽  
Stephen Holden ◽  
Swati Jha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Urinary Tract ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infection ◽  
Adult Women ◽  
Effective Treatment Option ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
Tract Infections

BackgroundUrinary tract infections (UTIs) are one of the most common reasons for women to attend primary care. There are four different antibiotics currently recommended in England for treatment of uncomplicated UTI but little evidence on their comparative cost-effectiveness.AimTo assess the relative cost-effectiveness of the four antibiotics currently recommended in England for treatment of uncomplicated UTI in adult women.Design & settingA cost-effectiveness model in adult women with signs and symptoms of uncomplicated UTI in primary care in England treated with fosfomycin, nitrofurantoin, pivmecillinam, or trimethoprim.MethodA decision tree economic model of the treatment pathway encompassed up to two rounds of treatment, accounting for different resistance levels. End points included recovery, persistence, pyelonephritis, and/or hospitalisation. Prescription, primary and secondary care treatment, and diagnostic testing costs were aggregated. Cost-effectiveness was assessed as cost per UTI resolved.ResultsTrimethoprim 200 mg twice daily (for 3 or 7 days) was estimated to be the most cost-effective treatment (£70 per UTI resolved) when resistance was <30%. However, if resistance to trimethoprim was ≥30%, fosfomycin 3 g once became more cost-effective; at resistance levels of ≥35% for trimethoprim, both fosfomycin 3 g once and nitrofurantoin 100 mg twice daily for 7 days were shown to be more cost-effective.ConclusionKnowing local resistance levels is key to effective and cost-effective empirical prescribing. Recent estimates of trimethoprim resistance rates are close to 50%, in which case a single 3 g dose of fosfomycin is likely to be the most cost-effective treatment option.

scholarly journals Randomised controlled trial of cognitive behavioural therapy in COPD

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 00094-2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Heslop-Marshall ◽  
Christine Baker ◽  
Debbie Carrick-Sen ◽  
Julia Newton ◽  
Carlos Echevarria ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Anxiety And Depression ◽  
Hospital Anxiety ◽  
Self Help ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
Anxiety Subscale

Anxiety is an important comorbidity in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We investigated if cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), delivered by respiratory nurses, reduced symptoms of anxiety and was cost-effective.Patients with COPD and anxiety were randomised to CBT or self-help leaflets. Anxiety, depression and quality of life were measured at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from a National Health Service hospital perspective and quality-adjusted life-years estimated using the EuroQol-5D questionnaire.In total, 279 patients were recruited. Group mean change from baseline to 3 months in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Anxiety Subscale was 3.4 (95% CI 2.62–4.17, p<0.001) for the CBT group and 1.88 (95% CI 1.19–2.55, p<0.001) in the leaflet group. The CBT group was superior to leaflets at 3 months (mean difference in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Anxiety Subscale was 1.52, 95% CI 0.49–2.54, p=0.003). Importantly, the CBT intervention was more cost-effective than leaflets at 12 months, significantly lowering hospital admissions and attendance at emergency departments.CBT delivered by respiratory nurses is a clinically and cost-effective treatment for anxiety in patients with COPD relative to self-help leaflets.

scholarly journals Paranoia — is it cost effective?

1990 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 296-297
Author(s):  
C. R. Whyte
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Major Consideration

The cost effectiveness of treatment has to be a major consideration in any well managed service. It is, therefore, the job of management to ensure that effective treatment is delivered efficiently.

scholarly journals The Cost-effectiveness of Celecoxib versus Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs plus Proton-pump Inhibitors for Treating Osteoarthritis in Algeria

10.36469/9865 ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 184-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadir Hammoumraoui ◽  
Sid Ahmed Kherraf ◽  
Joaquin Mould-Quevedo ◽  
Tarek A. Ismail
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Private Clinic ◽  
Effective Treatment Option ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Anti Inflammatory

Background: Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors such as celecoxib are as effective as non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (ns-NSAIDs) in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA), have fewer gastrointestinal side effects, but are more expensive. Objective: To evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of celecoxib versus ns-NSAIDs, with/without proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) co-therapy, for treating OA in Algeria. Methods: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) health economic model from UK, updated with relative risks of adverse events using CONDOR trial data, was adapted for costeffectiveness analysis in OA patients aged ≥65 years. Patients could initiate treatment with celecoxib or ns-NSAIDs with/without omeprazole. Conditional probabilities were obtained from published clinical trials; effectiveness measure was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained/patient. The analysis was conducted from a healthcare payer’s perspective. The average daily treatment costs and frequencies of resource use for adverse events were based on data collected in August 2011 from a private clinic located in Cheraga, Algiers, Algeria. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed to construct cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs). Results: QALYs gained/patient over a 6-month horizon were higher with celecoxib (0.368) and celecoxib+PPI (0.40) versus comparators. The lowest expected cost/patient was associated with ibuprofen (US$134.76 versus US$175.67 with celecoxib+PPI, and US$177.57 with celecoxib). Celecoxib+PPI was the most cost-effective drug treatment, with an ICER of US$584.43, versus ibuprofen. Treatment with celecoxib alone showed an ICER of US$1,530.56 versus diclofenac+PPI. These ICERs are &lt;1 gross domestic product per capita in Algeria (US$7,500). Over 1-year, 3-year and 5-year horizons, celecoxib with/without PPI co-therapy showed higher QALYs/patient versus comparators, and decreasing ICERs. The ICER of celecoxib+PPI was lower than that of comparators over all time horizons. These findings were confirmed with CEACs generated via PSA. Conclusion: Using data from a single private clinic in Cheraga, Algiers, Algeria, and after considering new adverse event risks, we showed that celecoxib with/without PPI co therapy is more cost-effective than ns-NSAID+PPI for treating OA patients aged ≥65 years. Celecoxib+PPI remains dominant over a 5-year horizon, making it the most cost-effective treatment option for medium- and long-term use.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and routine specialist care with and without cognitive–behavioural therapy in adolescents with major depression

2007 ◽  
Vol 191 (6) ◽  
pp. 521-527 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Byford ◽  
Barbara Barrett ◽  
Chris Roberts ◽  
Paul Wilkinson ◽  
Bernadka Dubicka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Major Depression ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Serotonin Reuptake ◽  
Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural

BackgroundMajor depression is an important and costly problem among adolescents, yet evidence to support the provision of cost-effective treatments is lacking.AimsTo assess the short-term cost-effectiveness of combined selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) together with clinical care compared with SSRIs and clinical care alone in adolescents with major depression.MethodPragmatic randomised controlled trial in the UK. Outcomes and costs were assessed at baseline, 12 and 28 weeks.ResultsThe trial comprised 208 adolescents, aged 11–17 years, with major or probable major depression who had not responded to a brief initial psychosocial intervention. There were no significant differences in outcome between the groups with and without CBT. Costs were higher in the group with CBT, although not significantly so (P=0.057). Cost-effectiveness analysis and exploration of the associated uncertainty suggest there is less than a 30% probability that CBT plus SSRIs is more cost-effective than SSRIs alone.ConclusionsA combination of CBT plus SSRIs is not more cost-effective in the short-term than SSRIs alone for treating adolescents with major depression in receipt of routine specialist clinical care.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of internet-delivered cognitive–behavioural therapy for adolescents with irritable bowel syndrome

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e023881 ◽  
Author(s):  
Filipa Sampaio ◽  
Marianne Bonnert ◽  
Ola Olén ◽  
Erik Hedman ◽  
Maria Lalouni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Irritable Bowel Syndrome ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Resource Use ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Irritable Bowel

ObjectiveTo assess whether exposure-based internet-delivered cognitive–behavioural therapy (internet-CBT) is a cost-effective treatment for adolescents with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) compared with a waitlist control, from a societal perspective, based on data from a randomised trial.DesignWithin-trial cost-effectiveness analysis.SettingParticipants were recruited from the whole of Sweden via primary, secondary and tertiary care clinics reached through news media and advertising.ParticipantsAdolescents (aged 13–17) with a diagnosis of IBS.InterventionsParticipants were randomised to either an exposure-based internet-CBT, including 10 weekly modules for adolescents and five modules for parents, or a waitlist.Outcome measuresThe main health outcome was the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) estimated by mapping Pediatric Quality-of-Life Inventory (PedsQL) scores onto EQ-5D-3L utilities. The secondary outcome was the point improvement on the PedsQL scale. Data on health outcomes and resource use were collected at baseline and 10 weeks post-treatment. Resource use was measured using the Trimbos and Institute of Medical Technology Assessment Cost Questionnaire for Psychiatry (TIC-P) . Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated as the difference in average costs by the difference in average outcomes between groups.ResultsThe base-case results showed that internet-CBT costs were on average US$170.24 (95% CI 63.14 to 315.04) more per participant than the waitlist. Adolescents in the internet-CBT group showed small QALY gains (0.0031; 95% CI 0.0003 to 0.0061), and an average improvement of 5.647 points (95% CI 1.82 to 9.46) on the PedsQL compared with the waitlist. Internet-CBT yielded an ICER of $54 916/QALY gained and a probability of cost-effectiveness of 74% given the Swedish willingness-to-pay threshold. The ICER for the outcome PedsQL was US$85.29/point improvement.ConclusionsOffering internet-CBT to adolescents with IBS improves health-related quality of life and generates small QALY gains at a higher cost than a waitlist control. Internet-CBT is thus likely to be cost-effective given the strong efficacy evidence, small QALY gains and low cost.Trial registration numberNCT02306369; Results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document