Cost-utility analysis of transdiagnostic cognitive behavioural therapy for people with persistent physical symptoms in contact with specialist services evaluated in the PRINCE secondary trial

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY Journal of Psychosomatic Research Pub Date : 2024-10-17 DOI:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2024.111960
Paul McCrone , Meenal Patel , Matthew Hotopf , Rona Moss-Morris , Mark Ashworth , Anthony S. David , Mujtaba Husain , Kirsty James , Sabine Landau , Trudie Chalder
{"title":"Cost-utility analysis of transdiagnostic cognitive behavioural therapy for people with persistent physical symptoms in contact with specialist services evaluated in the PRINCE secondary trial","authors":"Paul McCrone ,&nbsp;Meenal Patel ,&nbsp;Matthew Hotopf ,&nbsp;Rona Moss-Morris ,&nbsp;Mark Ashworth ,&nbsp;Anthony S. David ,&nbsp;Mujtaba Husain ,&nbsp;Kirsty James ,&nbsp;Sabine Landau ,&nbsp;Trudie Chalder","doi":"10.1016/j.jpsychores.2024.111960","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To compare the cost-utility of transdiagnostic cognitive behavioural therapy (TDT-CBT) plus standardised medical care (SMC) to SMC alone to support people with persistent physical symptoms in contact with specialist services.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This study compared the cost-utility of TDT-CBT. A two-arm randomised controlled trial was conducted in secondary care settings. Participants received either TDT-CBT + SMC or SMC alone. Measures were taken at baseline and at 9-, 20-, 40-, and 52-week follow-up. Service use was measured, and costs calculated. Costs were combined with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) based on the EQ-5D-5L using incremental cost-utility ratios with uncertainty addressed using cost-effectiveness planes and acceptability curves.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The costs during the follow-up period were £3473 for TDT-CBT + SMC and £3104 for SMC alone. The incremental cost for TDT-CBT + SMC adjusting for baseline was £482 (95 % CI, −£399 to £1233). QALYs over the follow-up were 0.578 for TDT-CBT + SMC and 0.542 for SMC alone. The incremental QALY was 0.038 (95 % CI, −0.005 to 0.080). The incremental cost per QALY was £12,684 for TDT-CBT + SMC. There was a 68.3 % likelihood that TDT-CBT + SMC was the most cost-effective option at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Adding TDT-CTB to SMC results in slightly increased costs and slightly better outcomes in terms of QALYs. This represents a cost-effective option based on the conventional QALY threshold value.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50074,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychosomatic Research","volume":"187 ","pages":"Article 111960"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychosomatic Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022399924003726","RegionNum":2,"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

To compare the cost-utility of transdiagnostic cognitive behavioural therapy (TDT-CBT) plus standardised medical care (SMC) to SMC alone to support people with persistent physical symptoms in contact with specialist services.

Methods

This study compared the cost-utility of TDT-CBT. A two-arm randomised controlled trial was conducted in secondary care settings. Participants received either TDT-CBT + SMC or SMC alone. Measures were taken at baseline and at 9-, 20-, 40-, and 52-week follow-up. Service use was measured, and costs calculated. Costs were combined with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) based on the EQ-5D-5L using incremental cost-utility ratios with uncertainty addressed using cost-effectiveness planes and acceptability curves.

Results

The costs during the follow-up period were £3473 for TDT-CBT + SMC and £3104 for SMC alone. The incremental cost for TDT-CBT + SMC adjusting for baseline was £482 (95 % CI, −£399 to £1233). QALYs over the follow-up were 0.578 for TDT-CBT + SMC and 0.542 for SMC alone. The incremental QALY was 0.038 (95 % CI, −0.005 to 0.080). The incremental cost per QALY was £12,684 for TDT-CBT + SMC. There was a 68.3 % likelihood that TDT-CBT + SMC was the most cost-effective option at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY.

Conclusion

Adding TDT-CTB to SMC results in slightly increased costs and slightly better outcomes in terms of QALYs. This represents a cost-effective option based on the conventional QALY threshold value.
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
在 PRINCE 二次试验中评估了针对与专科服务机构接触的持续性躯体症状患者的跨诊断认知行为疗法的成本效益分析。
目的:比较比较跨诊断认知行为疗法(TDT-CBT)加标准化医疗护理(SMC)与单纯标准化医疗护理的成本效益,以支持有持续性躯体症状的患者与专科服务机构联系:本研究比较了 TDT-CBT 的成本效益。这项研究比较了 TDT-CBT 的成本效益,并在二级医疗机构开展了一项双臂随机对照试验。参与者要么接受 TDT-CBT + SMC 治疗,要么只接受 SMC 治疗。在基线、9 周、20 周、40 周和 52 周的随访中进行了测量。对服务使用情况进行测量,并计算成本。根据 EQ-5D-5L 使用增量成本效用比将成本与质量调整生命年(QALYs)相结合,并使用成本效益平面和可接受性曲线解决不确定性问题:随访期间,TDT-CBT + SMC 的成本为 3473 英镑,单用 SMC 的成本为 3104 英镑。调整基线后,TDT-CBT + SMC 的增量成本为 482 英镑(95 % CI,-399 至 1233 英镑)。在随访期间,TDT-CBT + SMC 的 QALY 为 0.578,单用 SMC 的 QALY 为 0.542。增量 QALY 为 0.038(95 % CI,-0.005 至 0.080)。TDT-CBT+SMC的每QALY增量成本为12,684英镑。在每 QALY 20,000 英镑的临界值下,TDT-CBT + SMC 最具成本效益的可能性为 68.3%:结论:在 SMC 的基础上增加 TDT-CTB 会导致成本略有增加,但从 QALYs 的角度来看,效果略好。根据传统的 QALY 临界值,这是一种具有成本效益的方案。
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
Journal of Psychosomatic Research
Journal of Psychosomatic Research 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
6.40%
发文量
314
审稿时长
6.2 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Psychosomatic Research is a multidisciplinary research journal covering all aspects of the relationships between psychology and medicine. The scope is broad and ranges from basic human biological and psychological research to evaluations of treatment and services. Papers will normally be concerned with illness or patients rather than studies of healthy populations. Studies concerning special populations, such as the elderly and children and adolescents, are welcome. In addition to peer-reviewed original papers, the journal publishes editorials, reviews, and other papers related to the journal''s aims.
期刊最新文献
Resilience, psychosomatic health, and support needs of Ukrainian healthcare professionals in wartime: A cross-sectional study Metabolomics profiling of Type D personality traits Heart rate variability is not associated with multiple chemical sensitivity in a cross-sectional population-based study - The Danish study of functional disorders Clinical and metabolic correlates of DSM-5 mixed features in subjects with bipolar depression and mania: A cross-sectional study Strengthening cancer-spirituality research: A comprehensive analysis of methodological considerations in biomarker studies
×
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