Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility study of a psychoeducational group intervention for people with depression and physical comorbidity in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of a psychoeducational group intervention led by primary care (PC) nurses in relation to customary care to prevent the depression and improve quality of life in patients with physical comorbidity. DESIGN: Economic evaluation based on data from randomized, multicenter clinical trial with blind response variables and a one-year follow-up, carried in the context of the PSICODEP study. LOCATION: 7 PC teams from Catalonia. PARTICIPANTS: >50 year-old patients with depression and some physical comorbidity: diabetes mellitus type 2, ischemic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and/or asthma. INTERVENTION: 12 psychoeducational group sessions, 1 per week, led by 2 PC nurses with prior training. MEASUREMENTS: Effectiveness: depression-free days (DFD) calculated from the BDI-II and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from the Euroqol-5D. Direct costs: PC visits, mental health, emergencies and hospitalizations, drugs. Indirect costs: days of temporary disability (TD). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), cost-effectiveness (ΔCost/ΔDLD) and cost-utility (ΔCost/ΔQALY) were estimated. RESULTS: The study includes 380 patients (intervention group [IG] = 204; control group [CG] = 176). 81.6% women; mean age 68.4 (SD = 8.8). The IG had a higher mean cost of visits, less of hospitalizations and less TD than the CG. The difference in costs between the IG and the CG was -357.95€ (95% CI: -2026.96 to 1311.06) at one year of follow-up. There was a mean of 11.95 (95% CI: -15.98 to 39.88) more DFD in the IG than in the CG. QALYs were similar (difference -0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.05). The ICERs were 29.95€/DLD and 35,795€/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Psychoeducational intervention is associated with an improvement in DFD, as well as a reduction in costs at 12 months, although not significantly. QALYs were very similar between groups.

Socio-economic and psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic in a Spanish cohort BIOVAL-D-COVID-19 study protocol.

OBJECTIVE: SARS-CoV-2 outbreak has a negative psychological impact among general population. Data comparing mental health status before and during the outbreak is needed. The BIOVAL-D-COVID-19 study assess the socio-economic and psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown in a representative sample of non-institutionalized Spanish adult population, and estimate the incidence of mental health disorders, including suicidal behaviours, and possible related factors. METHOD: Observational longitudinal study including two online surveys: baseline survey (T0) performed during 2019 and follow-up survey (T1) conducted 12-month later. The latter included nine sections: socio-demographic, health status, mental health, employment conditions and status, material deprivation, use of healthcare services, intimate partner violence and resilience. Four of the nine sections are administered in T0 and T1 assessments. Longitudinal data analyses will estimate adjusted incidence rates of mental health disorders using Poisson regression models. Risk and protective factors will be analysed through multiple logistic regression models.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a multiple health behaviour change intervention in people aged between 45 and 75 years: a cluster randomized controlled trial in primary care (EIRA study).

BACKGROUND: Multiple health behaviour change (MHBC) interventions that promote healthy lifestyles may be an efficient approach in the prevention or treatment of chronic diseases in primary care. This study aims to evaluate the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of the health promotion EIRA intervention in terms of MHBC and cardiovascular reduction. METHODS: An economic evaluation alongside a 12-month cluster-randomised (1:1) controlled trial conducted between 2017 and 2018 in 25 primary healthcare centres from seven Spanish regions. The study took societal and healthcare provider perspectives. Patients included were between 45 and 75 years old and had any two of these three behaviours: smoking, insufficient physical activity or low adherence to Mediterranean dietary pattern. Intervention duration was 12 months and combined three action levels (individual, group and community). MHBC, defined as a change in at least two health risk behaviours, and cardiovascular risk (expressed in % points) were the outcomes used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated and used to calculate incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR). Missing data was imputed and bootstrapping with 1000 replications was used to handle uncertainty in the modelling results. RESULTS: The study included 3062 participants. Intervention costs were €295 higher than usual care costs. Five per-cent additional patients in the intervention group did a MHBC compared to usual care patients. Differences in QALYS or cardiovascular risk between-group were close to 0 (- 0.01 and 0.04 respectively). The ICER was €5598 per extra health behaviour change in one patient and €6926 per one-point reduction in cardiovascular risk from a societal perspective. The cost-utility analysis showed that the intervention increased costs and has no effect, in terms of QALYs, compared to usual care from a societal perspective. Cost-utility planes showed high uncertainty surrounding the ICUR. Sensitivity analysis showed results in line with the main analysis. CONCLUSION: The efficiency of EIRA intervention cannot be fully established and its recommendation should be conditioned by results on medium-long term effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03136211 . Registered 02 May 2017 - Retrospectively registered.

Economic Evaluations Informed Exclusively by Real World Data: A Systematic Review.

Economic evaluations using Real World Data (RWD) has been increasing in the very recent years, however, this source of information has several advantages and limitations. The aim of this review was to assess the quality of full economic evaluations (EE) developed using RWD. A systematic review was carried out through articles from the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Included were studies that employed RWD for both costs and effectiveness. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Of the 14,011 studies identified, 93 were included. Roughly half of the studies were carried out in a hospital setting. The most frequently assessed illnesses were neoplasms while the most evaluated interventions were pharmacological. The main source of costs and effects of RWD were information systems. The most frequent clinical outcome was survival. Some 47% of studies met at least 80% of CHEERS criteria. Studies were conducted with samples of 100-1000 patients or more, were randomized, and those that reported bias controls were those that fulfilled most CHEERS criteria. In conclusion, fewer than half the studies met 80% of the CHEERS checklist criteria.

Effectiveness of a psychoeducation group intervention conducted by primary healthcare nurses in patients with depression and physical comorbidity: study protocol for a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Depressive disorders are the third leading cause of consultation in primary care, mainly in patients with chronic physical illnesses. Studies have shown the effectiveness of group psychoeducation in reducing symptoms in depressive individuals. Our primary aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention based on a psychoeducational program, carried out by primary care nurses, to improve the remission/response rate of depression in patients with chronic physical illness. Secondarily, to assess the cost-effectiveness of the intervention, its impact on improving control of the physical pathology and quality of life, and intervention feasibility. METHODS/DESIGN: A multicenter, randomized, clinical trial, with two groups and one-year follow-up evaluation. Economic evaluation study. SUBJECTS: We will assess 504 patients (252 in each group) aged > 50 years assigned to 25 primary healthcare centers (PHC) from Catalonia (urban, semi-urban, and rural). Participants suffer from major depression (Beck depression inventory: BDI-II 13-28) and at least one of the following: type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, and/or ischemic cardiopathy. Patients with moderate/severe suicide risk or severe mental disorders are excluded. Participants will be distributed randomly into the intervention group (IG) and control (CG). INTERVENTION: The IG will participate in the psychoeducational intervention: 12 sessions of 90 min, once a week led by two Primary Care (PC) nurses. The sessions will consist of health education regarding chronic physical illness and depressive symptoms. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Clinical remission of depression and/or response to intervention (BDI-II). SECONDARY MEASUREMENTS: Improvement in control of chronic diseases (blood test and physical parameters), drug compliance (Morinsky-Green test and number of containers returned), quality of life (EQ-5D), medical service utilization (appointments and hospital admissions due to complications), and feasibility of the intervention (satisfaction and compliance). Evaluations will be blinded, and conducted at baseline, post-intervention, and 12 months follow-up. DISCUSSION: Results could be informative for efforts to prevent depression in patients with a chronic physical illness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03243799 (registration date August 9, 2017).

Complex multiple risk intervention to promote healthy behaviours in people between 45 to 75 years attended in primary health care (EIRA study): study protocol for a hybrid trial.

BACKGROUND: Health promotion is a key process of current health systems. Primary Health Care (PHC) is the ideal setting for health promotion but multifaceted barriers make its integration difficult in the usual care. The majority of the adult population engages two or more risk behaviours, that is why a multiple intervention might be more effective and efficient. The primary objectives are to evaluate the effectiveness, the cost-effectiveness and an implementation strategy of a complex multiple risk intervention to promote healthy behaviours in people between 45 to 75 years attended in PHC. METHODS: This study is a cluster randomised controlled hybrid type 2 trial with two parallel groups comparing a complex multiple risk behaviour intervention with usual care. It will be carried out in 26 PHC centres in Spain. The study focuses on people between 45 and 75 years who carry out two or more of the following unhealthy behaviours: tobacco use, low adherence to the Mediterranean dietary pattern or insufficient physical activity level. The intervention is based on the Transtheoretical Model and it will be made by physicians and nurses in the routine care of PHC practices according to the conceptual framework of the "5A's". It will have a maximum duration of 12 months and it will be carried out to three different levels (individual, group and community). Incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained measured by the tariffs of the EuroQol-5D questionnaire will be estimated. The implementation strategy is based on the "Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research", a set of discrete implementation strategies and an evaluation framework. DISCUSSION: EIRA study will determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a complex multiple risk intervention and will provide a better understanding of implementation processes of health promotion interventions in PHC setting. It may contribute to increase knowledge about the individual and structural barriers that affect implementation of these interventions and to quantify the contextual factors that moderate the effectiveness of implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03136211 .Retrospectively registered on May 2, 2017.