Racha Abi Hana, Jinane Abi Ramia, Sebastian Burchert, Kenneth Carswell, Pim Cuijpers, Eva Heim, Christine Knaevelsrud, Philip Noun, Marit Sijbrandij, Mark van Ommeren, Edith van’t Hof, Ben Wijnen, Edwina Zoghbi, Rabih El Chammay, Filip Smit
{"title":"黎巴嫩人道主义危机期间数字心理健康与常规护理的成本效益:实用随机试验","authors":"Racha Abi Hana, Jinane Abi Ramia, Sebastian Burchert, Kenneth Carswell, Pim Cuijpers, Eva Heim, Christine Knaevelsrud, Philip Noun, Marit Sijbrandij, Mark van Ommeren, Edith van’t Hof, Ben Wijnen, Edwina Zoghbi, Rabih El Chammay, Filip Smit","doi":"10.2196/55544","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<strong>Background:</strong> There is evidence from meta-analyses and systematic reviews that digital mental health interventions for depression, anxiety, and stress-related disorders tend to be cost-effective. However, no such evidence exists for guided digital mental health care in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) facing humanitarian crises, where the needs are highest. Step-by-Step (SbS), a digital mental health intervention for depression, anxiety, and stress-related disorders, proved to be effective for Lebanese citizens and war-affected Syrians residing in Lebanon. Assessing the cost-effectiveness of SbS is crucial because Lebanon’s overstretched health care system must prioritize cost-effective treatment options in the face of continuing humanitarian and economic crises. <strong>Objective:</strong> This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of SbS in a randomized comparison with enhanced usual care (EUC). <strong>Methods:</strong> The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted alongside a pragmatic randomized controlled trial in 2 parallel groups comparing SbS (n=614) with EUC (n=635). The primary outcome was cost (in US $ for the reference year 2019) per treatment response of depressive symptoms, defined as >50% reduction of depressive symptoms measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ). The secondary outcome was cost per remission of depressive symptoms, defined as a PHQ score <5 at last follow-up (5 months post baseline). The evaluation was conducted first from the health care perspective then from the societal perspective. <strong>Results:</strong> Taking the health care perspective, SbS had an 80% probability to be regarded as cost-effective compared with EUC when there is a willingness to pay US $220 per additional treatment response or US $840 per additional remission. Taking the wider societal perspective, SbS had a >75% probability to be cost-saving while gaining response or remission. <strong>Conclusions:</strong> To our knowledge, this study is the first cost-effectiveness analysis based on a large randomized controlled trial (n=1249) of a guided digital mental health intervention in an LMIC. From the principal findings, 2 implications flowed, from the (1) health care perspective and (2) wider societal perspective. First, our findings suggest that SbS is associated with greater health benefits, albeit for higher costs than EUC. It is up to decision makers in health care to decide if they find the balance between additional health gains and additional health care costs acceptable. Second, as seen from the wider societal perspective, there is a substantial likelihood that SbS is not costing more than EUC but is associated with cost-savings as SBS participants become more productive, thus offsetting their health care costs. This finding may suggest to policy makers that it is in the interest of both population health and the wider Lebanese economy to implement SbS on a wide scale. In brief, SbS may offer a scalable, potentially cost-saving response to humanitarian emergencies in an LMIC. <strong>Trial Registration:</strong> ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03720769; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03720769","PeriodicalId":48616,"journal":{"name":"Jmir Mental Health","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-Effectiveness of Digital Mental Health Versus Usual Care During Humanitarian Crises in Lebanon: Pragmatic Randomized Trial\",\"authors\":\"Racha Abi Hana, Jinane Abi Ramia, Sebastian Burchert, Kenneth Carswell, Pim Cuijpers, Eva Heim, Christine Knaevelsrud, Philip Noun, Marit Sijbrandij, Mark van Ommeren, Edith van’t Hof, Ben Wijnen, Edwina Zoghbi, Rabih El Chammay, Filip Smit\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/55544\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<strong>Background:</strong> There is evidence from meta-analyses and systematic reviews that digital mental health interventions for depression, anxiety, and stress-related disorders tend to be cost-effective. However, no such evidence exists for guided digital mental health care in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) facing humanitarian crises, where the needs are highest. Step-by-Step (SbS), a digital mental health intervention for depression, anxiety, and stress-related disorders, proved to be effective for Lebanese citizens and war-affected Syrians residing in Lebanon. Assessing the cost-effectiveness of SbS is crucial because Lebanon’s overstretched health care system must prioritize cost-effective treatment options in the face of continuing humanitarian and economic crises. <strong>Objective:</strong> This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of SbS in a randomized comparison with enhanced usual care (EUC). <strong>Methods:</strong> The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted alongside a pragmatic randomized controlled trial in 2 parallel groups comparing SbS (n=614) with EUC (n=635). The primary outcome was cost (in US $ for the reference year 2019) per treatment response of depressive symptoms, defined as >50% reduction of depressive symptoms measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ). The secondary outcome was cost per remission of depressive symptoms, defined as a PHQ score <5 at last follow-up (5 months post baseline). The evaluation was conducted first from the health care perspective then from the societal perspective. <strong>Results:</strong> Taking the health care perspective, SbS had an 80% probability to be regarded as cost-effective compared with EUC when there is a willingness to pay US $220 per additional treatment response or US $840 per additional remission. Taking the wider societal perspective, SbS had a >75% probability to be cost-saving while gaining response or remission. <strong>Conclusions:</strong> To our knowledge, this study is the first cost-effectiveness analysis based on a large randomized controlled trial (n=1249) of a guided digital mental health intervention in an LMIC. From the principal findings, 2 implications flowed, from the (1) health care perspective and (2) wider societal perspective. First, our findings suggest that SbS is associated with greater health benefits, albeit for higher costs than EUC. It is up to decision makers in health care to decide if they find the balance between additional health gains and additional health care costs acceptable. Second, as seen from the wider societal perspective, there is a substantial likelihood that SbS is not costing more than EUC but is associated with cost-savings as SBS participants become more productive, thus offsetting their health care costs. This finding may suggest to policy makers that it is in the interest of both population health and the wider Lebanese economy to implement SbS on a wide scale. In brief, SbS may offer a scalable, potentially cost-saving response to humanitarian emergencies in an LMIC. <strong>Trial Registration:</strong> ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03720769; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03720769\",\"PeriodicalId\":48616,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jmir Mental Health\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jmir Mental Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/55544\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jmir Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/55544","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:荟萃分析和系统综述有证据表明,针对抑郁症、焦虑症和压力相关疾病的数字心理健康干预措施往往具有成本效益。然而,在面临人道主义危机的中低收入国家(LMICs),数字心理健康护理的指导却没有这样的证据。Step-by-Step (SbS)是一种针对抑郁、焦虑和压力相关疾病的数字心理健康干预措施,对居住在黎巴嫩的黎巴嫩公民和受战争影响的叙利亚人证明是有效的。评估 SbS 的成本效益至关重要,因为面对持续的人道主义和经济危机,黎巴嫩捉襟见肘的医疗保健系统必须优先考虑具有成本效益的治疗方案。研究目的本研究旨在通过随机比较 SbS 和增强型常规护理 (EUC) 来评估其成本效益。方法:在进行成本效益分析的同时,我们还对 SbS 和增强型常规护理进行了比较:成本效益分析与一项务实的随机对照试验同时进行,试验分为两个平行组,分别比较 SbS(614 人)和 EUC(635 人)。主要结果是抑郁症状每次治疗反应的成本(以 2019 年为基准年,单位为美元),定义为使用患者健康问卷(PHQ)测量的抑郁症状减少 50%。次要结果是抑郁症状每次缓解的成本,定义为在最后一次随访(基线后 5 个月)时 PHQ 得分达到 5 分。评估首先从医疗保健角度进行,然后从社会角度进行。评估结果从医疗保健的角度来看,如果愿意为每增加一个治疗反应支付 220 美元或每增加一个缓解支付 840 美元,那么与 EUC 相比,SbS 被视为具有成本效益的可能性为 80%。从更广泛的社会角度来看,SbS 在获得应答或缓解的同时有 75% 的可能性节省成本。结论:据我们所知,这项研究是首个基于大型随机对照试验(n=1249)的成本效益分析,该试验是在低收入国家开展的一项有指导的数字心理健康干预措施。从主要研究结果中,我们得出了两点启示:(1)从医疗保健的角度;(2)从更广泛的社会角度。首先,我们的研究结果表明,尽管SbS的成本高于EUC,但却能带来更大的健康效益。至于他们是否认为额外的健康收益和额外的医疗成本之间的平衡是可以接受的,这取决于医疗决策者。其次,从更广泛的社会角度来看,很有可能保健服务的成本并不比欧盟补偿金高,但却能节省成本,因为保健服务参与者的生产率提高了,从而抵消了他们的保健成本。这一发现可能会向政策制定者提出建议,即广泛实施 SbS 既符合人口健康的利益,也符合黎巴嫩更广泛的经济利益。简而言之,SbS 可为低收入国家和地区的人道主义紧急情况提供一种可扩展、有可能节约成本的应对措施。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03720769; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03720769
Cost-Effectiveness of Digital Mental Health Versus Usual Care During Humanitarian Crises in Lebanon: Pragmatic Randomized Trial
Background: There is evidence from meta-analyses and systematic reviews that digital mental health interventions for depression, anxiety, and stress-related disorders tend to be cost-effective. However, no such evidence exists for guided digital mental health care in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) facing humanitarian crises, where the needs are highest. Step-by-Step (SbS), a digital mental health intervention for depression, anxiety, and stress-related disorders, proved to be effective for Lebanese citizens and war-affected Syrians residing in Lebanon. Assessing the cost-effectiveness of SbS is crucial because Lebanon’s overstretched health care system must prioritize cost-effective treatment options in the face of continuing humanitarian and economic crises. Objective: This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of SbS in a randomized comparison with enhanced usual care (EUC). Methods: The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted alongside a pragmatic randomized controlled trial in 2 parallel groups comparing SbS (n=614) with EUC (n=635). The primary outcome was cost (in US $ for the reference year 2019) per treatment response of depressive symptoms, defined as >50% reduction of depressive symptoms measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ). The secondary outcome was cost per remission of depressive symptoms, defined as a PHQ score <5 at last follow-up (5 months post baseline). The evaluation was conducted first from the health care perspective then from the societal perspective. Results: Taking the health care perspective, SbS had an 80% probability to be regarded as cost-effective compared with EUC when there is a willingness to pay US $220 per additional treatment response or US $840 per additional remission. Taking the wider societal perspective, SbS had a >75% probability to be cost-saving while gaining response or remission. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study is the first cost-effectiveness analysis based on a large randomized controlled trial (n=1249) of a guided digital mental health intervention in an LMIC. From the principal findings, 2 implications flowed, from the (1) health care perspective and (2) wider societal perspective. First, our findings suggest that SbS is associated with greater health benefits, albeit for higher costs than EUC. It is up to decision makers in health care to decide if they find the balance between additional health gains and additional health care costs acceptable. Second, as seen from the wider societal perspective, there is a substantial likelihood that SbS is not costing more than EUC but is associated with cost-savings as SBS participants become more productive, thus offsetting their health care costs. This finding may suggest to policy makers that it is in the interest of both population health and the wider Lebanese economy to implement SbS on a wide scale. In brief, SbS may offer a scalable, potentially cost-saving response to humanitarian emergencies in an LMIC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03720769; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03720769
期刊介绍:
JMIR Mental Health (JMH, ISSN 2368-7959) is a PubMed-indexed, peer-reviewed sister journal of JMIR, the leading eHealth journal (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175).
JMIR Mental Health focusses on digital health and Internet interventions, technologies and electronic innovations (software and hardware) for mental health, addictions, online counselling and behaviour change. This includes formative evaluation and system descriptions, theoretical papers, review papers, viewpoint/vision papers, and rigorous evaluations.