scholarly journals Economic evaluation of cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) for improving health outcomes in adult population: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e032176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Natalie Natsky ◽  
Andrew Vakulin ◽  
Ching Li Chai-Coetzer ◽  
Leon Lack ◽  
R. Doug McEvoy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Adult Population ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Cost Minimisation Analysis ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural

IntroductionInsomnia is associated with a number of adverse consequences that place a substantial economic burden on individuals and society. Cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is a promising intervention that can improve outcomes in people who suffer from insomnia. However, evidence of its cost-effectiveness remains unclear. In this study, we will systematically review studies that report on economic evaluations of CBT-I and investigate the potential economic benefit of CBT-I as a treatment for insomnia.Methods and analysisThe search will include studies that use full economic evaluation methods (ie, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, cost-benefit, cost-consequences and cost-minimisation analysis) and those that apply partial economic evaluation approaches (ie, cost description, cost-outcome description and cost analysis). We will conduct a preliminary search in MEDLINE, Google Scholar, MedNar and ProQuest dissertation and theses to build the searching terms. A full search strategy using all identified keywords and index terms will then be undertaken in several databases including MEDLINE, Psychinfo, Proquest, Cochrane, Scopus, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science and EMBASE. We will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for protocol guidelines in this review. Only articles in the English language and those reporting on adult populations will be included. We will use standardised data extraction tools for economic evaluations to retrieve and synthesise information from selected studies into themes and summarised in a Joanna Briggs Institute dominance ranking matrix.Ethics and disseminationNo formal ethics approval will be required as we will not be collecting primary data. Review findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication, workshops, conference presentations and a media release.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019133554.

Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility evaluation of the individual vs. group transdiagnostic psychological treatment for emotional disorders in Primary Care (PsicAP-Costs) v2

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angel Aguilera-Martin ◽  
Mario Gálvez-Lara ◽  
Fátima Cuadrado ◽  
Eliana Moreno ◽  
Francisco García-Torres ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Emotional Disorders ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Psychological Treatment ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
Utility Evaluation ◽  
The Individual

The aim of this study is to compare, in cost-effectiveness and cost-utility terms, a brief transdiagnostic cognitive-behavioural therapy in two different modes, individual and group, with the treatment usually administered in primary care (TAU). Participants between 18 and 65 years old and with, according to the pretreatment evaluation, mild to moderate emotional disorders will be randomly allocated to the three clusters. They will be assessed again immediately after treatment and 6 and 12 months later. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04847310

scholarly journals Economic evaluation of online computerised cognitive–behavioural therapy without support for depression in primary care: randomised trial

2010 ◽  
Vol 196 (4) ◽  
pp. 310-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. A. H. Gerhards ◽  
L. E. de Graaf ◽  
L. E. Jacobs ◽  
J. L. Severens ◽  
M. J. H. Huibers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Significant Group ◽  
Efficient Treatment ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
The Cost

BackgroundEvidence about the cost-effectiveness and cost utility of computerised cognitive–behavioural therapy (CCBT) is still limited. Recently, we compared the clinical effectiveness of unsupported, online CCBT with treatment as usual (TAU) and a combination of CCBT and TAU (CCBT plus TAU) for depression. The study is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register, part of the Dutch Cochrane Centre (ISRCTN47481236).AimsTo assess the cost-effectiveness of CCBT compared with TAU and CCBT plus TAU.MethodCosts, depression severity and quality of life were measured for 12 months. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were performed from a societal perspective. Uncertainty was dealt with by bootstrap replications and sensitivity analyses.ResultsCosts were lowest for the CCBT group. There are no significant group differences in effectiveness or quality of life. Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses tend to be in favour of CCBT.ConclusionsOn balance, CCBT constitutes the most efficient treatment strategy, although all treatments showed low adherence rates and modest improvements in depression and quality of life.

scholarly journals Computerised cognitive–behavioural therapy for depression in adolescents: 12-month outcomes of a UK randomised controlled trial pilot study

BJPsych Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry Wright ◽  
Lucy Tindall ◽  
Rebecca Hargate ◽  
Victoria Allgar ◽  
Dominic Trépel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Care Pathway ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Self Help ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background Computerised cognitive–behavioural therapy (CCBT) in the care pathway has the potential to improve access to psychological therapies and reduce waiting lists within Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services, however, more randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to assess this. Aims This single-centre RCT pilot study compared a CCBT program (Stressbusters) with an attention control (self-help websites) for adolescent depression at referral to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of CCBT (trial registration: ISRCTN31219579). Method The trial ran within community and clinical settings. Adolescents (aged 12–18) presenting to their primary mental health worker service for low mood/depression support were assessed for eligibility at their initial appointment, 139 met inclusion criteria (a 33-item Mood and Feelings Questionnaire score of ≥20) and were randomised to Stressbusters (n = 70) or self-help websites (n = 69) using remote computerised single allocation. Participants completed mood, quality of life (QoL) and resource-use measures at intervention completion, and 4 and 12 months post-intervention. Changes in self-reported measures and completion rates were assessed by group. Results There was no significant difference between CCBT and the website group at 12 months. Both showed improvements on all measures. QoL measures in the intervention group showed earlier improvement compared with the website group. Costs were lower in the intervention group but the difference was not statistically significant. The cost-effectiveness analysis found just over a 65% chance of Stressbusters being cost-effective compared with websites. The 4-month follow-up results from the initial feasibility study are reported separately. Conclusions CCBT and self-help websites may both have a place in the care pathway for adolescents with depression.

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 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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document