BACKGROUND: Effective psychological therapies have been recommended for common mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety, but provision has been poor. Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) may provide a cost-effective solution to this problem. AIMS: To determine the cost-effectiveness of IAPT at the Doncaster demonstration site (2007-2009). METHOD: An economic evaluation comparing costs and health outcomes for patients at the IAPT demonstration site with those for comparator sites, including a separate assessment of lost productivity. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken. RESULTS: The IAPT site had higher service costs and was associated with small additional gains in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with its comparator sites, resulting in a cost per QALY gained of £29 500 using the Short Form (SF-6D). Sensitivity analysis using predicted EQ-5D scores lowered this to £16 857. Costs per reliable and clinically significant (RCS) improvement were £9440 per participant. CONCLUSIONS: Improving Access to Psychological Therapies provided a service that was probably cost-effective within the usual National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) threshold range of £20 000-30 000, but there was considerable uncertainty surrounding the costs and outcome differences.
BACKGROUND: Effective psychological therapies have been recommended for common mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety, but provision has been poor. Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) may provide a cost-effective solution to this problem. AIMS: To determine the cost-effectiveness of IAPT at the Doncaster demonstration site (2007-2009). METHOD: An economic evaluation comparing costs and health outcomes for patients at the IAPT demonstration site with those for comparator sites, including a separate assessment of lost productivity. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken. RESULTS: The IAPT site had higher service costs and was associated with small additional gains in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with its comparator sites, resulting in a cost per QALY gained of £29 500 using the Short Form (SF-6D). Sensitivity analysis using predicted EQ-5D scores lowered this to £16 857. Costs per reliable and clinically significant (RCS) improvement were £9440 per participant. CONCLUSIONS: Improving Access to Psychological Therapies provided a service that was probably cost-effective within the usual National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) threshold range of £20 000-30 000, but there was considerable uncertainty surrounding the costs and outcome differences.
Authors: Darshan Zala; Alison Brabban; Alex Stirzaker; Muralikrishnan Radhakrishnan Kartha; Paul McCrone Journal: Community Ment Health J Date: 2019-03-08
Authors: Jonathan Tosh; Ben Kearns; Alan Brennan; Glenys Parry; Thomas Ricketts; David Saxon; Alexis Kilgarriff-Foster; Anna Thake; Eleni Chambers; Rebecca Hutten Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2013-04-26 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Juan V Luciano; Francesco D'Amico; Marta Cerdà-Lafont; María T Peñarrubia-María; Martin Knapp; Antonio I Cuesta-Vargas; Antoni Serrano-Blanco; Javier García-Campayo Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2014-10-01 Impact factor: 5.156
Authors: Colin Green; David A Richards; Jacqueline J Hill; Linda Gask; Karina Lovell; Carolyn Chew-Graham; Peter Bower; John Cape; Stephen Pilling; Ricardo Araya; David Kessler; J Martin Bland; Simon Gilbody; Glyn Lewis; Chris Manning; Adwoa Hughes-Morley; Michael Barkham Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-08-14 Impact factor: 3.240