ObjectiveTo optimize treatment recommendations for eating disorders, it is important to investigate whether some individuals may benefit more (or less) from certain treatments. The current study... Show moreObjectiveTo optimize treatment recommendations for eating disorders, it is important to investigate whether some individuals may benefit more (or less) from certain treatments. The current study explored predictors and moderators of an automated online self-help intervention “Featback” and online support from a recovered expert patient.MethodsData were used from a randomized controlled trial. For a period of 8 weeks, participants aged 16 or older with at least mild eating disorder symptoms were randomized to four conditions: (1) Featback, (2) chat or e-mail support from an expert patient, (3) Featback with expert-patient support, and (4) a waitlist. A mixed-effects partitioning method was used to see if age, educational level, BMI, motivation to change, treatment history, duration of eating disorder, number of binge eating episodes in the past month, eating disorder pathology, self-efficacy, anxiety and depression, social support, or self-esteem predicted or moderated intervention outcomes in terms of eating disorder symptoms (primary outcome), and symptoms of anxiety and depression (secondary outcome).ResultsHigher baseline social support predicted less eating disorder symptoms 8 weeks later, regardless of condition. No variables emerged as moderator for eating disorder symptoms. Participants in the three active conditions who had not received previous eating disorder treatment, experienced larger reductions in anxiety and depression symptoms.DiscussionThe investigated online low-threshold interventions were especially beneficial for treatment-naïve individuals, but only in terms of secondary outcomes, making them well-suited for early intervention. The study results also highlight the importance of a supportive environment for individuals with eating disorder symptoms.Public SignificanceTo optimize treatment recommendations it is important to investigate what works for whom. For an internet-based intervention for eating disorders developed in the Netherlands, individuals who had never received eating disorder treatment seemed to benefit more from the intervention than those who had received eating disorder treatment, because they experienced larger reductions in symptoms of depression and anxiety. Stronger feelings of social support were related to less eating disorder symptoms in the future. Show less
Background: The economic costs of mental disorders for society are huge. Internet-based interventions are often coined as cost-effective alternatives to usual care, but the evidence is mixed... Show moreBackground: The economic costs of mental disorders for society are huge. Internet-based interventions are often coined as cost-effective alternatives to usual care, but the evidence is mixed.Objective: The aim was to review the literature on the cost-effectiveness of internet interventions for mental disorders compared with usual care and to provide an estimate of the monetary benefits of such interventions compared with usual care.Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted, which included participants with symptoms of mental disorders; investigated a telephone- or internet-based intervention; included a control condition in the form of treatment as usual, psychological placebo, waiting list control, or bibliotherapy; reported outcomes on both quality of life and costs; and included articles published in English. Electronic databases such as PubMed (including MEDLINE), Embase, Emcare, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were used. Data on risk of bias, quality of the economic evaluation, quality-adjusted life years, and costs were extracted from the included studies, and the incremental net benefit was calculated and pooled.Results: The search yielded 6226 abstracts, and 37 studies with 14,946 participants were included. The quality of economic evaluations of the included studies was rated as moderate, and the risk of bias was high. A random-effects approach was maintained. Analyses suggested internet interventions were slightly more effective than usual care in terms of quality-adjusted life years gain (Hedges g=0.052, 95% CI 0.010-0.094; P=.02) and equally expensive (Hedges g=0.002, 95% CI −0.080 to 0.84; P=.96). The pooled incremental net benefit was US $255 (95% CI US $91 to US $419; P=.002), favoring internet interventions over usual care. The perspective of the economic evaluation and targeted mental disorder moderated the results.Conclusions: The findings indicate that the cost-effectiveness of internet interventions for mental disorders compared with a care-as-usual approach is likely, but generalizability to new studies is poor given the substantial heterogeneity. This is the first study in the field of mental health to pool cost-effectiveness outcomes in an aggregate data meta-analysis. Show less
Rohrbach, P.J.; Dingemans, A.E.; Spinhoven, P.; Ginkel, J.R. van; Fokkema, M.; Wilderjans, T.F.; ... ; Furth, E.F. van 2022
Objective: Many individuals with an eating disorder do not receive appropriate care. Low-threshold interventions could help bridge this treatment gap. The study aim was to evaluate the... Show moreObjective: Many individuals with an eating disorder do not receive appropriate care. Low-threshold interventions could help bridge this treatment gap. The study aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of Featback, a fully automated online self-help intervention, online expert-patient support and their combination. Method: A randomized controlled trial with a 12-month follow-up period was conducted. Participants aged 16 or older with at least mild eating disorder symptoms were randomized to four conditions: (1) Featback, a fully automated online self-help intervention, (2) chat or email support from a recovered expert patient, (3) Featback with expert-patient support and (4) a waiting list control condition. The intervention period was 8 weeks and there was a total of six online assessments. The main outcome constituted reduction of eating disorder symptoms over time. Results: Three hundred fifty five participants, of whom 43% had never received eating disorder treatment, were randomized. The three active interventions were superior to a waitlist in reducing eating disorder symptoms (d = -0.38), with no significant difference in effectiveness between the three interventions. Participants in conditions with expert-patient support were more satisfied with the intervention. Discussion: Internet-based self-help, expert-patient support and their combination were effective in reducing eating disorder symptoms compared to a waiting list control condition. Guidance improved satisfaction with the internet intervention but not its effectiveness. Low-threshold interventions such as Featback and expert-patient support can reduce eating disorder symptoms and reach the large group of underserved individuals, complementing existing forms of eating disorder treatment. Public significance statement: Individuals with eating-related problems who received (1) a fully automated internet-based intervention, (2) chat and e-mail support by a recovered individual or (3) their combination, experienced stronger reductions in eating disorder symptoms than those who received (4) usual care. Such brief and easy-access interventions play an important role in reaching individuals who are currently not reached by other forms of treatment. Show less
Objective The primary aim was assessing the cost-effectiveness of an internet-based self-help program, expert-patient support, and the combination of both compared to a care-as-usual condition.... Show moreObjective The primary aim was assessing the cost-effectiveness of an internet-based self-help program, expert-patient support, and the combination of both compared to a care-as-usual condition. Method :An economic evaluation from a societal perspective was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial. Participants aged 16 or older with at least mild eating disorder symptoms were randomly assigned to four conditions: (1) Featback, an online unguided self-help program, (2) chat or e-mail support from a recovered expert patient, (3) Featback with expert-patient support, and (4) care-as-usual. After a baseline assessment and intervention period of 8 weeks, five online assessments were conducted over 12 months of follow-up. The main result constituted cost-utility acceptability curves with quality-of-life adjusted life years (QALYs) and societal costs over the entire study duration. Results: No significant differences between the conditions were found regarding QALYs, health care costs and societal costs. Nonsignificant differences in QALYs were in favor of the Featback conditions and the lowest societal costs per participant were observed in the Featback only condition (euro16,741) while the highest costs were seen in the care-as-usual condition (euro28,479). The Featback only condition had the highest probability of being efficient compared to the alternatives for all acceptable willingness-to-pay values. Discussion: Featback, an internet-based unguided self-help intervention, was likely to be efficient compared to Featback with guidance from an expert patient, guidance alone and a care-as-usual condition. Results suggest that scalable interventions such as Featback may reduce health care costs and help individuals with eating disorders that are currently not reached by other forms of treatment. Public significance statement: Internet-based interventions for eating disorders might reach individuals in society who currently do not receive appropriate treatment at low costs. Featback, an online automated self-help program for eating disorders, was found to improve quality of life slightly while reducing costs for society, compared to a do-nothing approach. Consequently, implementing internet-based interventions such as Featback likely benefits both individuals suffering from an eating disorder and society as a whole. Show less
