Maartje Goorden1, Klaas M L Huijbregts2, Harm W J van Marwijk3, Aartjan T F Beekman2, Christina M van der Feltz-Cornelis4, Leona Hakkaart-van Roijen5. 1. Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Institute of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: Goorden@bmg.eur.nl. 2. GGZinGeest, partner VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Psychiatry and the EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Department of General Practice and the EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Tranzo, University of Tilburg, Tilburg, The Netherlands; Topclinical Center for Body, Mind and Health Academic Psychiatry Department, GGZBreburg, Tilburg, The Netherlands. 5. Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Institute of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Major depression is a great burden on society, as it is associated with high disability/costs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-utility of Collaborative Care (CC) for major depressive disorder compared to Care As Usual (CAU) in a primary health care setting from a societal perspective. METHODS: A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted, including 93 patients that were identified by screening (45-CC, 48-CAU). Another 57 patients were identified by the GP (56-CC, 1-CAU). The outcome measures were TiC-P, SF-HQL and EQ-5D, respectively measuring health care utilization, production losses and general health related quality of life at baseline three, six, nine and twelve months. A cost-utility analysis was performed for patients included by screening and a sensitivity analysis was done by also including patients identified by the GP. RESULTS: The average annual total costs was €1131 (95% C.I., €-3158 to €750) lower for CC compared to CAU. The average quality of life years (QALYs) gained was 0.02 (95% C.I., -0.004 to 0.04) higher for CC, so CC was dominant from a societal perspective. Taking a health care perspective, CC was less cost-effective due to higher costs, €1173 (95% C.I., €-216 to €2726), of CC compared to CAU which led to an ICER of 53,717 Euro/QALY. The sensitivity analysis showed dominance of CC. CONCLUSION: The cost-utility analysis from a societal perspective showed that CC was dominant to CAU. CC may be a promising treatment for depression in the primary care setting. Further research should explore the cost-effectiveness of long-term CC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register ISRCTN15266438.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Major depression is a great burden on society, as it is associated with high disability/costs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-utility of Collaborative Care (CC) for major depressive disorder compared to Care As Usual (CAU) in a primary health care setting from a societal perspective. METHODS: A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted, including 93 patients that were identified by screening (45-CC, 48-CAU). Another 57 patients were identified by the GP (56-CC, 1-CAU). The outcome measures were TiC-P, SF-HQL and EQ-5D, respectively measuring health care utilization, production losses and general health related quality of life at baseline three, six, nine and twelve months. A cost-utility analysis was performed for patients included by screening and a sensitivity analysis was done by also including patients identified by the GP. RESULTS: The average annual total costs was €1131 (95% C.I., €-3158 to €750) lower for CC compared to CAU. The average quality of life years (QALYs) gained was 0.02 (95% C.I., -0.004 to 0.04) higher for CC, so CC was dominant from a societal perspective. Taking a health care perspective, CC was less cost-effective due to higher costs, €1173 (95% C.I., €-216 to €2726), of CC compared to CAU which led to an ICER of 53,717 Euro/QALY. The sensitivity analysis showed dominance of CC. CONCLUSION: The cost-utility analysis from a societal perspective showed that CC was dominant to CAU. CC may be a promising treatment for depression in the primary care setting. Further research should explore the cost-effectiveness of long-term CC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register ISRCTN15266438.
Authors: Amy M Kilbourne; Kathryn Beck; Brigitta Spaeth-Rublee; Parashar Ramanuj; Robert W O'Brien; Naomi Tomoyasu; Harold Alan Pincus Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 49.548
Authors: Eric W de Heer; Jack Dekker; Aartjan T F Beekman; Harm W J van Marwijk; Tjalling J Holwerda; Pierre M Bet; Joost Roth; Lotte Timmerman; Christina M van der Feltz-Cornelis Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2018-04-05 Impact factor: 4.157
Authors: Maartje Goorden; Christina M van der Feltz-Cornelis; Kirsten M van Steenbergen-Weijenburg; Eva K Horn; Aartjan Tf Beekman; Leona Hakkaart-van Roijen Journal: Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat Date: 2017-07-18 Impact factor: 2.570
Authors: Anne Berghöfer; Sabrina Hense; Thomas Birker; Torsten Hejnal; Frank Röwenstrunk; Marion Albrecht; Daniela Erdmann; Thomas Reinhold; Barbara Stöckigt Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2020-02-12 Impact factor: 4.157
Authors: James Rufus John; Hir Jani; Kath Peters; Kingsley Agho; W Kathy Tannous Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-09-21 Impact factor: 3.390