IntroductionThe aim is to perform an economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial comparing guided self-help cognitive behavioral therapy-enhanced (CBT-E) for binge-eating disorder ... Show moreIntroductionThe aim is to perform an economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial comparing guided self-help cognitive behavioral therapy-enhanced (CBT-E) for binge-eating disorder (BED) to a waiting list control condition. MethodsBED patients (N = 212) were randomly assigned to guided self-help CBT-E or the 3-month waiting list. Measurements took place at baseline and the end-of-treatment. The cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using the number of binge-eating episodes during the last 28 days as an outcome indicator according to the eating disorder examination. A cost-utility analysis was performed using the EuroQol-5D. ResultsThe difference in societal costs over the 3 months of the intervention between both conditions was euro679 (confidence interval [CI] 50-1330). The incremental costs associated with one incremental binge eating episode prevented in the guided self-help condition was approximately euro18 (CI 1-41). From a societal perspective there was a 96% likelihood that guided self-help CBT-E led to a greater number of binge-eating episodes prevented, but at higher costs. Each additional quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained was associated with incremental costs of euro34,000 (CI 2494-154,530). With a 95% likelihood guided self-help CBT-E led to greater QALY gain at higher costs compared to waiting for treatment. Based on the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence willingness-to-pay threshold of euro35,000 per QALY, guided self-help CBT-E can be considered cost-effective with a likelihood of 95% from a societal perspective. DiscussionGuided self-help CBT-E is likely a cost-effective treatment for BED in the short-term (3-month course of treatment). Comparison to treatment-as-usual is recommended for future research, as it enables an economic evaluation with a longer time horizon. Public SignificanceOffering treatment remotely has several benefits for patients suffering from binge-eating disorders. Guided self-help CBT-E is an efficacious and likely cost-effective treatment, reducing binge eating and improving quality-of-life, albeit at higher societal costs. 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
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
Rohrbach, P.J.; Dingemans, A.E.; Groothuis-Oudshoorn, C.G.M.; Til, J.A. van; Essers, B.A.; Furth, E.F. van; Akker-Van Marle, M.E. van den 2022
Objectives: The ICEpop Capability Measure for Adults (ICECAP-A) assesses 5 capabilities (stability, attachment, autonomy, achievement, and enjoyment) that are important to one's quality of life and... Show moreObjectives: The ICEpop Capability Measure for Adults (ICECAP-A) assesses 5 capabilities (stability, attachment, autonomy, achievement, and enjoyment) that are important to one's quality of life and might be an important addition to generic health questionnaires currently used in economic evaluations. This study aimed to develop a Dutch tariff of the Dutch translation of the ICECAP-A. Methods: The methods used are similar to those used in the development of the UK tariff. A profile case best-worst scaling task was presented to 1002 participants from the general Dutch population. A scale-adjusted latent class analysis was performed to test for preferences of ICECAP-A capabilities and scale heterogeneity. Results: A 3-preference class 2-scale class model with worst choice as scale predictor was considered optimal and was used to calculate the resulting tariff. Results indicated that the capabilities stability, attachment, and enjoyment were considered more important aspects of quality of life than autonomy and achievement. Additionally, improving capabilities from low to moderate levels had a larger effect on quality of life than improving capabilities that were already at a higher level. Conclusions: The ICECAP-A tariffs found in this study could be used in economic evaluations of healthcare interventions in The Netherlands. Show less
Background: Epilepsy is associated with a high disease burden, impacting the lives of people with epilepsy and their caregivers and family. Persons with medically refractory epilepsy experience the... Show moreBackground: Epilepsy is associated with a high disease burden, impacting the lives of people with epilepsy and their caregivers and family. Persons with medically refractory epilepsy experience the greatest burden, suffering from profound physical, psychological, and social consequences. Anecdotal evidence suggests these persons may benefit from a seizure dog. As the training of a seizure dog is a substantial investment, their accessibility is limited in the absence of collective reimbursement as is seen in the Netherlands. Despite sustained interest in seizure dogs, scientific knowledge on their benefits and costs remains scarce. To substantiate reimbursement decisions stronger evidence is required. The EPISODE study aims to provide this evidence by evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of seizure dogs in adults with medically refractory epilepsy.Methods: The study is designed as a stepped wedge randomized controlled trial that compares the use of seizure dogs in addition to usual care, with usual care alone. The study includes adults with epilepsy for whom current treatment options failed to achieve seizure freedom. Seizure frequency of participants should be at least two seizures per week, and the seizures should be associated with a high risk of injury or dysfunction. During the 3 year follow-up period, participants receive a seizure dog in a randomized order. Outcome measures are taken at multiple time points both before and after receiving the seizure dog. Seizure frequency is the primary outcome of the study and will be recorded continuously using a seizure diary. Questionnaires measuring seizure severity, quality of life, well-being, resource use, productivity, social participation, and caregiver burden will be completed at baseline and every 3 months thereafter. The study is designed to include a minimum of 25 participants.Discussion: This protocol describes the first randomized controlled trial on seizure dogs. The study will provide comprehensive data on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of seizure dogs in adults with medically refractory epilepsy. Broader benefits of seizure dogs for persons with epilepsy and their caregivers are taken into account, as well as the welfare of the dogs. The findings of the study can be used to inform decision-makers on the reimbursement of seizure dogs. Show less
