改善孕期孕产妇心理健康的电子正念干预(eMBI)的卫生经济评估--随机对照试验(RCT)。

IF 2.7 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Health Economics Review Pub Date : 2024-07-30 DOI:10.1186/s13561-024-00537-z
Lena Hasemann, Svenja Elkenkamp, Mitho Müller, Armin Bauer, Stephanie Wallwiener, Wolfgang Greiner
{"title":"改善孕期孕产妇心理健康的电子正念干预(eMBI)的卫生经济评估--随机对照试验(RCT)。","authors":"Lena Hasemann, Svenja Elkenkamp, Mitho Müller, Armin Bauer, Stephanie Wallwiener, Wolfgang Greiner","doi":"10.1186/s13561-024-00537-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Anxiety and depression are the most prevalent psychiatric diseases in the peripartum period. They can lead to relevant health consequences for mother and child as well as increased health care resource utilization (HCRU) and related costs. Due to the promising results of mindfulness-based interventions (MBI) and digital health applications in mental health, an electronic MBI on maternal mental health during pregnancy was implemented and assessed in terms of transferability to standard care in Germany. The present study focused the health economic outcomes of the randomized controlled trial (RCT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The analysis, adopting a payer's and a societal perspective, included women of increased emotional distress at < 29 weeks of gestation. We applied inferential statistics (α = 0.05 significance level) to compare the intervention group (IG) and control group (CG) in terms of HCRU and costs. The analysis was primarily based on statutory health insurance claims data which covered the individual observational period of 40 weeks.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 258 women (IG: 117, CG: 141) were included in the health economic analysis. The results on total health care costs from a payer's perspective indicated higher costs for the IGi compared to the CG (Exp(ß) = 1.096, 95% CI: 1.006-1.194, p = 0.037). However, the estimation was not significant after Bonferroni correction (p < 0.006). Even the analysis from a societal perspective as well as sensitivity analyses did not show significant results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the present study, the eMBI did neither reduced nor significantly increased health care costs. Further research is needed to generate robust evidence on eMBIs for women suffering from peripartum depression and anxiety.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00017210. Registered on 13 January 2020. Retrospectively registered.</p>","PeriodicalId":46936,"journal":{"name":"Health Economics Review","volume":"14 1","pages":"60"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11290259/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Health economic evaluation of an electronic mindfulness-based intervention (eMBI) to improve maternal mental health during pregnancy - a randomized controlled trial (RCT).\",\"authors\":\"Lena Hasemann, Svenja Elkenkamp, Mitho Müller, Armin Bauer, Stephanie Wallwiener, Wolfgang Greiner\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13561-024-00537-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Anxiety and depression are the most prevalent psychiatric diseases in the peripartum period. They can lead to relevant health consequences for mother and child as well as increased health care resource utilization (HCRU) and related costs. Due to the promising results of mindfulness-based interventions (MBI) and digital health applications in mental health, an electronic MBI on maternal mental health during pregnancy was implemented and assessed in terms of transferability to standard care in Germany. The present study focused the health economic outcomes of the randomized controlled trial (RCT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The analysis, adopting a payer's and a societal perspective, included women of increased emotional distress at < 29 weeks of gestation. We applied inferential statistics (α = 0.05 significance level) to compare the intervention group (IG) and control group (CG) in terms of HCRU and costs. The analysis was primarily based on statutory health insurance claims data which covered the individual observational period of 40 weeks.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 258 women (IG: 117, CG: 141) were included in the health economic analysis. The results on total health care costs from a payer's perspective indicated higher costs for the IGi compared to the CG (Exp(ß) = 1.096, 95% CI: 1.006-1.194, p = 0.037). However, the estimation was not significant after Bonferroni correction (p < 0.006). Even the analysis from a societal perspective as well as sensitivity analyses did not show significant results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the present study, the eMBI did neither reduced nor significantly increased health care costs. Further research is needed to generate robust evidence on eMBIs for women suffering from peripartum depression and anxiety.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00017210. Registered on 13 January 2020. Retrospectively registered.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46936,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Economics Review\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"60\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11290259/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Economics Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-024-00537-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Economics Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-024-00537-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:焦虑和抑郁是围产期最常见的精神疾病。它们会给母婴带来相关的健康后果,并增加医疗资源利用率(HCRU)和相关费用。基于正念的干预(MBI)和数字健康应用在心理健康方面取得了可喜的成果,因此在德国实施了一项关于孕期孕产妇心理健康的电子MBI,并评估了其与标准护理的可转换性。本研究的重点是随机对照试验(RCT)的卫生经济成果:方法:从支付方和社会的角度进行分析,将结果中情绪困扰增加的妇女包括在内:共有 258 名妇女(IG:117 人,CG:141 人)被纳入健康经济分析。从支付方的角度来看,医疗总成本结果显示,IGi 的成本高于 CG(Exp(ß) = 1.096,95% CI:1.006-1.194,p = 0.037)。然而,经过 Bonferroni 校正后,估计值并不显著(p 结论:IGi 与 CG 相比具有更高的成本效益:在本研究中,eMBI 既没有降低医疗成本,也没有显著增加医疗成本。需要进一步研究,以获得针对围产期抑郁和焦虑妇女的 eMBI 的可靠证据:试验注册:德国临床试验注册中心:DRKS00017210.注册日期:2020 年 1 月 13 日。追溯注册。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Health economic evaluation of an electronic mindfulness-based intervention (eMBI) to improve maternal mental health during pregnancy - a randomized controlled trial (RCT).

Background: Anxiety and depression are the most prevalent psychiatric diseases in the peripartum period. They can lead to relevant health consequences for mother and child as well as increased health care resource utilization (HCRU) and related costs. Due to the promising results of mindfulness-based interventions (MBI) and digital health applications in mental health, an electronic MBI on maternal mental health during pregnancy was implemented and assessed in terms of transferability to standard care in Germany. The present study focused the health economic outcomes of the randomized controlled trial (RCT).

Methods: The analysis, adopting a payer's and a societal perspective, included women of increased emotional distress at < 29 weeks of gestation. We applied inferential statistics (α = 0.05 significance level) to compare the intervention group (IG) and control group (CG) in terms of HCRU and costs. The analysis was primarily based on statutory health insurance claims data which covered the individual observational period of 40 weeks.

Results: Overall, 258 women (IG: 117, CG: 141) were included in the health economic analysis. The results on total health care costs from a payer's perspective indicated higher costs for the IGi compared to the CG (Exp(ß) = 1.096, 95% CI: 1.006-1.194, p = 0.037). However, the estimation was not significant after Bonferroni correction (p < 0.006). Even the analysis from a societal perspective as well as sensitivity analyses did not show significant results.

Conclusions: In the present study, the eMBI did neither reduced nor significantly increased health care costs. Further research is needed to generate robust evidence on eMBIs for women suffering from peripartum depression and anxiety.

Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00017210. Registered on 13 January 2020. Retrospectively registered.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.20%
发文量
59
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Economics Review is an international high-quality journal covering all fields of Health Economics. A broad range of theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy with a health economic focus will be considered for publication. Its scope includes macro- and microeconomics of health care financing, health insurance and reimbursement as well as health economic evaluation, health services research and health policy analysis. Further research topics are the individual and institutional aspects of health care management and the growing importance of health care in developing countries.
期刊最新文献
Impact of pilot public hospital reform on efficiencies: a DEA analysis of county hospitals in East China, 2009-2015. What can we learn about the impact of cancelled planned operations on waiting times? A case study using the 2017/18 winter flu postponement policy in England. Catastrophic and impoverishing out-of-pocket health expenditure in Ethiopia: evidence from the Ethiopia socioeconomic survey. Modelling epidemiological and economics processes - the case of cervical cancer. The heterogeneous association between education and the adoption of safe food handling practices in Ethiopia.
×
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