Trial-based economic evaluation of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy compared to treatment as usual for bipolar disorder

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research Pub Date : 2023-09-12 DOI:10.1002/mpr.1981
Ben Wijnen, Maud Jansen, Annelieke van Velthoven, Imke Hanssen, Marloes Huijbers, Silvia Evers, Anne Speckens
{"title":"Trial-based economic evaluation of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy compared to treatment as usual for bipolar disorder","authors":"Ben Wijnen,&nbsp;Maud Jansen,&nbsp;Annelieke van Velthoven,&nbsp;Imke Hanssen,&nbsp;Marloes Huijbers,&nbsp;Silvia Evers,&nbsp;Anne Speckens","doi":"10.1002/mpr.1981","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>Aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) and treatment as usual (TAU) compared to TAU alone in adults with Bipolar disorder (BD).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>An economic evaluation with a time horizon of 15 months was conducted from a societal perspective. Outcomes were expressed in costs per quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs per responder using the inventory of depressive symptomatology clinician rating score.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>People with BD (<i>N</i> = 144) were included in this study. From a societal perspective, the difference of total costs between MBCT + TAU and TAU was €615, with lower costs in the MBCT + TAU group. Only healthcare costs differed significantly between the two groups. A small difference in QALYs in favor of MBCT + TAU was found combined with lower costs (−€836; baseline adjusted) for MBCT + TAU compared to TAU, resulting in a dominant incremental cost-utility ratio. The probability that the MBCT + TAU was cost-effective was 65%. All sensitivity analyses attested to the robustness of the base case analyses.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Concludingly, MBCT + TAU seems to be cost-effective compared to TAU alone, indicated by a small or neglectable difference in effect, in favor of MBCT + TAU, while resulting in lower costs.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50310,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10804328/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mpr.1981","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) and treatment as usual (TAU) compared to TAU alone in adults with Bipolar disorder (BD).

Methods

An economic evaluation with a time horizon of 15 months was conducted from a societal perspective. Outcomes were expressed in costs per quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs per responder using the inventory of depressive symptomatology clinician rating score.

Results

People with BD (N = 144) were included in this study. From a societal perspective, the difference of total costs between MBCT + TAU and TAU was €615, with lower costs in the MBCT + TAU group. Only healthcare costs differed significantly between the two groups. A small difference in QALYs in favor of MBCT + TAU was found combined with lower costs (−€836; baseline adjusted) for MBCT + TAU compared to TAU, resulting in a dominant incremental cost-utility ratio. The probability that the MBCT + TAU was cost-effective was 65%. All sensitivity analyses attested to the robustness of the base case analyses.

Conclusion

Concludingly, MBCT + TAU seems to be cost-effective compared to TAU alone, indicated by a small or neglectable difference in effect, in favor of MBCT + TAU, while resulting in lower costs.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于试验的双相情感障碍认知疗法与常规治疗的经济评估。
研究目的本研究旨在评估正念认知疗法(MBCT)和常规治疗(TAU)与单纯TAU治疗双相情感障碍(BD)成人患者的成本效益和成本效用:方法:从社会角度进行了一项时间跨度为 15 个月的经济评估。评估结果以每质量调整生命年(QALYs)的成本和使用抑郁症状清单临床医生评分的每位应答者的成本表示:本研究纳入了抑郁症患者(N = 144)。从社会角度来看,MBCT + TAU 和 TAU 的总成本相差 615 欧元,MBCT + TAU 组的成本更低。只有医疗成本在两组之间存在明显差异。与 TAU 相比,MBCT + TAU 的 QALYs 差异较小,而 MBCT + TAU 的成本较低(-836 欧元;基线调整),因此增量成本效用比占优势。MBCT + TAU 具有成本效益的概率为 65%。所有的敏感性分析都证明了基础案例分析的稳健性:总之,MBCT + TAU 与单用 TAU 相比似乎具有成本效益,其效果差异较小或可忽略不计,MBCT + TAU 更受青睐,同时成本更低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
6.50%
发文量
48
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research (MPR) publishes high-standard original research of a technical, methodological, experimental and clinical nature, contributing to the theory, methodology, practice and evaluation of mental and behavioural disorders. The journal targets in particular detailed methodological and design papers from major national and international multicentre studies. There is a close working relationship with the US National Institute of Mental Health, the World Health Organisation (WHO) Diagnostic Instruments Committees, as well as several other European and international organisations. MPR aims to publish rapidly articles of highest methodological quality in such areas as epidemiology, biostatistics, generics, psychopharmacology, psychology and the neurosciences. Articles informing about innovative and critical methodological, statistical and clinical issues, including nosology, can be submitted as regular papers and brief reports. Reviews are only occasionally accepted. MPR seeks to monitor, discuss, influence and improve the standards of mental health and behavioral neuroscience research by providing a platform for rapid publication of outstanding contributions. As a quarterly journal MPR is a major source of information and ideas and is an important medium for students, clinicians and researchers in psychiatry, clinical psychology, epidemiology and the allied disciplines in the mental health field.
期刊最新文献
Introducing the “IJMPR Didactic Papers” Network analysis: An overview for mental health research Are there subgroup differences in the accuracy of ‘screening’ questions for mood and anxiety disorder diagnostic interviews? A prediction model for differential resilience to the effects of combat-related stressors in US army soldiers A control theoretic approach to evaluate and inform ecological momentary interventions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1