A pilot economic evaluation of computerized cognitive behavioral therapy for alcohol use disorder as an addition and alternative to traditional therapy.

BACKGROUND: Computer-based delivery of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) may be a less costly approach to increase dissemination and implementation of evidence-based treatments for alcohol use disorder (AUD). However, comprehensive evaluations of costs, cost-effectiveness, and cost-benefit of computer-delivered interventions are rare. METHODS: This study used data from a completed randomized clinical trial to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of a computer-based version of CBT (CBT4CBT) for AUD. Sixty-three participants were randomized to receive one of the following treatments at an outpatient treatment facility and attended at least one session: (1) treatment as usual (TAU), (2) CBT4CBT plus treatment as usual (CBT4CBT+TAU), or (3) CBT4CBT plus brief monitoring. RESULTS: Median protocol treatment costs per participant differed significantly between conditions, Kruskal-Wallis H(2) = 8.40, p = 0.02, such that CBT4CBT+TAU and CBT4CBT+monitoring each cost significantly more per participant than TAU. However, when nonprotocol treatment costs were included, total treatment costs per participant did not differ significantly between conditions. Median incremental cost-effective ratios (ICERs) revealed that CBT4CBT+TAU was more costly and more effective than TAU. It cost $35.08 to add CBT4CBT to TAU to produce a reduction of one additional drinking day per month between baseline and the end of the 8-week treatment protocol: CBT4CBT+monitoring cost $33.70 less to produce a reduction of one additional drinking day per month because CBT4CBT+monitoring was less costly than TAU and more effective at treatment termination, though not significantly so. Net benefit analyses suggested that costs of treatment, regardless of condition, did not offset monthly costs related to healthcare utilization, criminal justice involvement, and employment disruption between baseline and 6-month follow-up. Benefit-cost ratios were similar for each condition. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this pilot economic evaluation suggest that an 8-week course of CBT4CBT may be a cost-effective addition and potential alternative to standard outpatient treatment for AUD. Additional research is needed to generate conclusions about the cost-benefit of providing CBT4CBT to treatment-seeking individuals participating in standard outpatient treatment.

Video cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia in cancer patients: A cost-effective alternative.

OBJECTIVE: Despite its high prevalence, cancer-related insomnia typically remains untreated because of a lack of access to cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), the treatment of choice for this condition. While face-to-face CBT-I appears to be optimal in terms of efficacy, self-administered formats may be more cost-effective. The goal of this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial was to compare the cost-effectiveness of a professionally-based CBT-I (PCBT-I) to that of a video-based CBT-I (VCBT-I). METHODS: A total of 161 women with breast cancer received six weekly, individual CBT-I sessions (PCBT-I; n = 81) or a 60-minutes animated video +6 short booklets (VCBT-I; n = 80). Participants completed the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) and provided information to calculate treatment costs. RESULTS: Total per patient treatment costs were 5.5 times greater for PCBT-I ($1298.90) than VCBT-I ($234.36; P < .0001). Both at posttreatment and 3-month follow-up, the ISI reduction was greater in PCBT-I than VCBT-I, but these differences were not significant (P = .09 and P = .24, respectively). In contrast, the cost-effectiveness ratio was significantly more advantageous for VCBT-I than PCBT-I. Compared to VCBT-I, each reduction of 1 unit on the ISI produced by PCBT-I was associated with a treatment cost that was significantly greater at posttreatment ($186.95 CAD vs $44.87 CAD; P = .001) and follow-up ($154.76 vs $24.97, P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: Although CBT-I is slightly less efficacious when self-administered, it constitutes a much more cost-effective alternative than face-to-face CBT-I and represents an extremely valuable option in settings where monetary and human resources required to administer CBT-I are not available or sufficient.

Low-Intensity Guided Help Through Mindfulness (LIGHTMIND): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial comparing supported mindfulness-based cognitive therapy self-help to supported cognitive behavioural therapy self-help for adults experiencing depression.

BACKGROUND: Depression has serious personal, family and economic consequences. It is estimated that it will cost £12.15 billion to the economy each year in England by 2026. Improving access to psychological therapies (IAPT) is the National Health Service talking therapies service in England for adults experiencing anxiety or depression. Over 1 million people are referred to IAPT every year, over half experiencing depression. Where symptoms of depression are mild to moderate, people are typically offered cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) self-help (CBT-SH) supported by a psychological well-being practitioner. The problem is that over half of people who complete treatment for depression in IAPT remain depressed despite receiving National Institute of Health and Care Excellent recommended treatment. Furthermore, less than half of IAPT service users complete treatment. This study seeks to investigate the effectiveness of an alternative to CBT-SH. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) differs from CBT in focus, approach and practice, and may be more effective with a higher number of treatment completions. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a definitive randomised controlled trial comparing supported MBCT self-help (MBCT-SH) with CBT-SH for adults experiencing mild to moderate depression being treated in IAPT services. We will recruit 410 participants experiencing mild to moderate depression from IAPT services and randomise these to receive either an MBCT-based self-help workbook or a CBT-based self-help workbook. Participants will be asked to complete their workbook within 16 weeks, with six support sessions with a psychological well-being practitioner. The primary outcome is depression symptom severity on treatment completion. Secondary outcomes are treatment completion rates and measures of generalized anxiety, well-being, functioning and mindfulness. An exploratory non-inferiority analysis will be conducted in the event the primary hypothesis is not supported. A semi-structured interview with participants will guide understanding of change processes. DISCUSSION: If the findings from this randomised controlled trial demonstrate that MBCT-SH is more effective than CBT-SH for adults experiencing depression, this will provide evidence for policy makers and lead to changes to clinical practice in IAPT services, leading to greater choice of self-help treatment options and better outcomes for service users. If the exploratory non-inferiority analysis is conducted and this indicates non-inferiority of MBCT-SH in comparison to CBT-SH this will also be of interest to policy makers when seeking to increase service user choice of self-help treatment options for depression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trial registration number: ISRCTN 13495752. Registered on 31 August 2017 (www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN13495752).

Evaluating the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a Cognitive Occupation-Based programme for people with Multiple Sclerosis (COB-MS): protocol for a feasibility cluster-randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive difficulties experienced by people with multiple sclerosis (MS) impact their quality of life and daily functioning, from childcare and work, to social and self-care activities. Despite the high prevalence of cognitive difficulties seen in MS, there is a lack of developed programmes that target cognition, while also supporting patients by helping them to function well in everyday life. The Cognitive Occupation-Based programme for people with MS (COB-MS) was developed as a holistic, individualised cognitive rehabilitation intervention. It addresses the wide-ranging symptoms and functional difficulties that present in MS, including the ability to maintain employment, social activities, home management and self-care. The aim of the current research is to evaluate the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of COB-MS for people with MS. The focus is on feasibility outcomes as well as functioning associated with cognitive difficulty and secondary outcomes related to cognition, fatigue and quality of life. METHODS: One hundred and twenty people with MS will be assigned to participate in either the COB-MS programme or a treatment as usual, wait-list control group as part of this single-blind, cluster-randomised controlled feasibility and preliminary efficacy trial of the COB-MS programme. The COB-MS group will participate in an eight-session occupational-based cognitive rehabilitation programme over 9 weeks. The primary outcome measure is the goal attainment scaling at 12 weeks. Participants will be assessed pre-intervention, post-intervention and at 12 weeks post-intervention and 6 months post-intervention. Qualitative evaluations of participants' perspectives will also be examined as part of the feasibility study. DISCUSSION: Results will provide recommendations for a future definitive trial of COB-MS, with respect to both feasibility and preliminary, clinical efficacy. In the event that results indicate efficacy, study findings will suggest that COB-MS requires consideration as a means of enhancing cognitive and daily functioning in people living with MS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: ISRCTN11462710. Registered on 9 September 2019.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy Versus Antidepressant Pharmacotherapy for Prevention of Depressive Relapse in a Canadian Context: Analyse coût-utilité de la thérapie cognitive basée sur la pleine conscience contre la pharmacothérapie antidépressive pour prévenir la rechute de la dépression en contexte canadien.

OBJECTIVE: Patients suffering from major depressive disorder (MDD) experience impaired functioning and reduced quality of life, including an elevated risk of episode return. MDD is associated with high societal burden due to increased healthcare utilization, productivity losses, and suicide-related costs, making the long-term management of this illness a priority. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT), a first-line preventative psychological treatment, compared to maintenance antidepressant medication (ADM), the current standard of care. METHOD: A cost-utility analysis was conducted over a 24-month time horizon to model differences between MBCT and ADM in cost and quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The analysis was conducted using a decision tree analytic model. Intervention efficacy, utility, and costing data estimates were derived from published sources and expert consultation. RESULTS: MBCT was found to be cost-effective compared to maintenance ADM over a 24-month time horizon. Antidepressant pharmacotherapy resulted in 1.10 QALY and $17,255.37 per patient on average, whereas MBCT resulted in 1.18 QALY and $15,030.70 per patient on average. This resulted in a cost difference of $2,224.67 and a QALY difference of 0.08, in favor of MBCT. Multiple sensitivity analyses supported these findings. CONCLUSIONS: From both a societal and health system perspective, utilizing MBCT as a first-line relapse prevention treatment is potentially cost-effective in a Canadian setting. Future economic evaluations should consider combined treatment (e.g., ADM and psychotherapy) as a comparator and longer time horizons as the literature advances.

Cost-Effectiveness of Treatment Alternatives for Treatment-Refractory Pediatric Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.

PURPOSE: Current guidelines for first-line treatment of childhood OCD are cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) utilizing exposure and response prevention (ERP), and/or antidepressant (ADM) pharmacotherapy, specifically serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRI). Given that first-line are relatively similar in terms of clinical effectiveness, the role of costs to provide such services may help influence treatment decisions. In the case of treatment refractory pediatric OCD, this cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) aims to further evaluate two additional, higher intensity combination therapies, namely OCD-specific Intensive Outpatient (IOP) and Partial Hospitalization Programs (PHP), to determine the additional benefits, in terms of effectiveness, that may result, and the corresponding increase in costs for these higher-intensity courses of therapy. RESULTS: IOP was the most cost-effective strategy in terms of change in CY-BOCS, pre/post treatment, equal to 16.42 units, followed by PHP and CBT monotherapy augmented with ADM CBT-monotherapy augmented with additional CBT and ADM-only augmented with CBT followed closely with 15.56 and 14.75 unit improvements in CY-BOCS. IOP accomplished its superior cost-effectiveness with an Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER), of $48,834, lower than either of the established willingness to Pay thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of access to high fidelity, high dose CBT paired with pharmacotherapy is an issue for OCD patients and families. Among youth who were treatment non-responsive, these results indicate the superiority of a high dosage CBT strategy, indicating the need to increase access to these treatments.

Cost-utility of individual internet-based and face-to-face Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy compared with treatment as usual in reducing psychological distress in cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: It was previously determined that group-based face-to-face Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) and individual internet-based MBCT (eMBCT) are equally efficacious compared with treatment as usual (TAU) in reducing psychological distress. In this study, the incremental cost-utility of both interventions compared with TAU was assessed. METHODS: This cost-utility study included 245 self-referred heterogeneous cancer patients with psychological distress who were randomized to MBCT, eMBCT or TAU. Healthcare costs and (informal) work-related productivity losses were assessed by interview. Outcomes were expressed in EuroQol-5D-3L utility scores and quality-adjusted life years (QALY). An economic evaluation with a time-horizon of 3 months was conducted from the societal perspective in the intention-to-treat sample. In addition, secondary explorative analyses of costs and quality of life during the 9-month follow-up were conducted based on linear extrapolation of TAU. RESULTS: Paid work-related productivity losses and societal costs were lower in both intervention conditions compared with TAU during the 3-month intervention period. Moreover, quality of life (utility scores) improved in eMBCT versus TAU (Cohen's d: .54) and MBCT versus TAU (.53). At a willingness to pay of €20000 per QALY, the mean incremental net monetary benefit was €1916 (SD=€783) in eMBCT and €2365 (SD=€796) in MBCT versus TAU. Exploration of costs demonstrated an equal pattern of eMBCT and MBCT being superior to TAU. Quality of life at 9-month follow-up remained improved in both interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that eMBCT and MBCT are cost-saving treatments whilst simultaneously improving quality of life for distressed cancer patients.

Interventions of computerized psychotherapies for depression in Primary Care in Spain.

Currently, depression is a global health problem recognized by the WHO. The prevalence of this pathology in Primary Care is estimated at 19.5% worldwide, and 20.2% in Spain. In addition, the current intervention policies and protocols involve significant costs, both personal and economic, for people suffering from this disorder, as well as for society in general. On the other hand, the relapse rates after pharmacological interventions that are currently applied and the lack of effective specialized attention in mental health services reflect the need to develop new therapeutic strategies that are more accessible and profitable. Therefore, one of the proposals that are being investigated in different parts of the world is the design and evaluation of therapeutic protocols applied through Information and Communication Technologies, especially through the Internet and computer programs. The objective of this work was to present the current situation in Spain regarding the use of these interventions for the treatment of depression in Primary Care. The main conclusion is that although there is scientific evidence on the effectiveness of these programs, there are still important barriers that hinder their application in the public system, and also the need to develop implementation studies that facilitate the transition from research to clinical practice.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized study of depression treatment options in primary care suggests stepped-care treatment may have economic benefits.

BACKGROUND: The stepped-care pathway (SCP) model has previously been found to be clinically effective for depressive disorder in some studies, but not all. Several groups have suggested that a stepped-care approach is the most appropriate in primary care. There is relatively little information, however, regarding which specific stepped-care pathway may be best. This analysis aimed to determine cost-effectiveness of a stepped-care pathway for depression in adults in primary care versus standard care (SC), treatment-as-usual (TAU), and online cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). METHODS: We conducted a randomized trial with 1400 participants and 12-week follow-up to assess the impact of the four treatment options on health-related quality of life and depression severity. Costs for the groups were calculated on the basis of physician, outpatient, and inpatient services using administrative data. We then calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios using this information. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and incremental cost-effectiveness scatterplots were created using Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 replications. A subgroup analysis was conducted for participants who screened as depressed at baseline. RESULTS: For all participants, TAU was the most expensive followed by CBT, SC, and SCP. QALYs were highest in SCP, followed by SC, CBT, and TAU. In the depressed subgroup, TAU was still the most expensive, followed by SC, SCP, and CBT, while QALYs were still highest in SCP, followed by SC, CBT, and TAU. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curves suggested that SCP had a higher probability for cost-effectiveness than the other three alternatives in all participants. In the depressed subgroup, CBT was associated with the highest probability of cost-effectiveness for a willingness-to-pay cut-off of less than approximately $50,000, while SCP was the highest at a cut-off higher than $50,000. There is considerable uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis showed that even where there are no clinically significant differences in health outcomes between treatment approaches, there may be economic benefit from implementing the stepped-care model. While more work is required to identify the most clinically effective versions of a stepped-care pathway, our findings suggest that the care pathway may have potential to improve health care system value. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01975207 . The trial was prospectively registered on 4 November 2013.

Treatment-Refractory Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder in Adults: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Treatment Strategies.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to assess the cost-effectiveness of 7 treatment strategies for treatment-refractory obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in adults. METHODS: A model was developed to evaluate treatment alternatives for adults (18-64 years old) that consisted of 2 parts: a decision analytic model and a Markov model. The decision analytic model stratified 7 outpatient treatment strategies, and the Markov model accumulated benefits and costs across the life expectancy of a simulated cohort of individuals. The model was parameterized with probabilistic and deterministic parameters from the literature and an outcomes database to perform a Monte Carlo simulation of a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 adults with OCD to estimate net health benefits (NHBs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for each treatment strategy. OCD was considered treatment refractory in adults with an OCD diagnosis who failed first-line therapies. Encounters took place from 2012 to 2015, and the analyses were performed from November 2016 to February 2017. RESULTS: Partial hospitalization with step-down to intensive outpatient treatment was the most cost-effective of the 7 strategies, with an estimated ICER of $7,983 and mean (SD) NHB of 10.96 (0.53) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) remaining. This result was 2.2 QALYs greater than that of the trial-based antidepressant and cognitive-behavioral therapy (ADM + CBT) strategy. Three additional ADM + CBT strategies were estimated not to be statistically significantly different from each other. These 4 ADM + CBT strategies outperformed both pharmacotherapy-only strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment strategies that include higher-intensity CBT, with effectiveness outcomes that approached efficacy estimates, were superior to real-world CBT strategies. However, given the limited availability of high-quality CBT, especially through use of commercial insurance networks, specialized treatment programs offer greater effectiveness than real-world therapies in achieving wellness for this severe patient population.

Economic Impact of Third-Wave Cognitive Behavioral Therapies: A Systematic Review and Quality Assessment of Economic Evaluations in Randomized Controlled Trials.

The term third-wave cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) encompasses new forms of CBT that both extend and innovate within CBT. Most third-wave therapies have been subject to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focused on clinical effectiveness; however, the number and quality of economic evaluations in these RCTs has been unknown and may be few. Evidence about efficiency of these therapies may help support decisions on efficient allocation of resources in health policies. The main aim of this study was to systematically review the economic impact of third-wave therapies in the treatment of patients with physical or mental conditions. We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and CINALH to identify economic evaluations of third-wave therapies. Quality and Risk of Bias (RoB) assessment of economic evaluations was also made using the Drummond 35-item checklist and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias, respectively. Eleven RCTs were included in this systematic review. Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT), Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR), Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT), and extended Behaviour Activation (eBA) showed acceptable cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios. No study employed a time horizon of more than 3 years. Quality and RoB assessments highlight some limitations that temper the findings. There is some evidence that MBCT, MBSR, ACT, DBT, and eBA are efficient from a societal or a third-party payer perspective. No economic analysis was found for many third-wave therapies. Therefore, more economic evaluations with high methodological quality are needed.

Cost-Effectiveness of Internet-Based Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment for Bulimia Nervosa: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Internet-based cognitive-behavioral therapy for bulimia nervosa (CBT-BN) compared to face-to-face delivery of CBT-BN. METHODS: This study is a planned secondary analysis of data from a randomized clinical trial. Participants were 179 adults (98% female, mean age = 28 years) meeting DSM-IV criteria for bulimia nervosa who were randomized to group face-to-face or group Internet-based CBT-BN for 16 sessions during 20 weeks. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from a third-party payor perspective, and a partial societal perspective analysis was conducted to investigate cost-utility (ie, cost per gain in quality-adjusted life-years) and patient out-of-pocket travel-related costs. Net health care costs were calculated from protocol and nonprotocol health care services using third-party payor cost estimates. The primary outcome measure in the clinical trial was abstinence from binge eating and purging, and the trial start and end dates were 2008 and 2016. RESULTS: The mean cost per abstinent patient at posttreatment was $7,757 (95% confidence limit [CL], $4,515, $13,361) for face-to-face and $11,870 (95% CL, $6,486, $22,188) for Internet-based CBT-BN, and at 1-year follow-up was $16,777 (95% CL, $10,298, $27,042) for face-to-face and $14,561 (95% CL, $10,165, $21,028) for Internet-based CBT-BN. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment arms in cost-effectiveness or cost-utility at posttreatment or 1-year follow-up. Out-of-pocket patient costs were significantly higher for face-to-face (mean [95% CL] = $178 [$127, $140]) than Internet-based ($50 [$50, $50]) therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Third-party payor cost-effectiveness of Internet-based CBT-BN is comparable with that of an accepted standard. Internet-based dissemination of CBT-BN may be a viable alternative for patients geographically distant from specialist eating disorder services who have an unmet need for treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00877786​.

Cost-effectiveness of Mindfulness-based Stress Reduction Versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy or Usual Care Among Adults With Chronic Low Back Pain.

STUDY DESIGN: Economic evaluation alongside a randomized trial of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) versus usual care alone (UC) for chronic low back pain (CLBP). OBJECTIVE: To determine 1-year cost-effectiveness of CBT and MBSR compared to 33 UC. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: CLBP is expensive in terms of healthcare costs and lost productivity. Mind-body interventions have been found effective for back pain, but their cost-effectiveness is unexplored. METHODS: A total of 342 adults in an integrated healthcare system with CLBP were randomized to receive MBSR (n = 116), CBT (n = 113), or UC (n = 113). CBT and MBSR were offered in 8-weekly 2-hour group sessions. Cost-effectiveness from the societal perspective was calculated as the incremental sum of healthcare costs and productivity losses over change in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The payer perspective only included healthcare costs. This economic evaluation was limited to the 301 health plan members enrolled ≥180 days in the years pre-and postrandomization. RESULTS: Compared with UC, the mean incremental cost per participant to society of CBT was $125 (95% confidence interval, CI: -4103, 4307) and of MBSR was -$724 (CI: -4386, 2778)-that is, a net saving of $724. Incremental costs per participant to the health plan were $495 for CBT over UC and -$982 for MBSR, and incremental back-related costs per participant were $984 for CBT over UC and -$127 for MBSR. These costs (and cost savings) were associated with statistically significant gains in QALYs over UC: 0.041 (0.015, 0.067) for CBT and 0.034 (0.008, 0.060) for MBSR. CONCLUSION: In this setting CBT and MBSR have high probabilities of being cost-effective, and MBSR may be cost saving, as compared with UC for adults with CLBP. These findings suggest that MBSR, and to a lesser extent CBT, may provide cost-effective treatment for CLBP for payers and society. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is cost-effective compared to a wait-list control for persistent pain in women treated for primary breast cancer-Results from a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) compared to a wait-list control group for pain in women treated for breast cancer. METHODS: A total of 129 women were randomly allocated to MBCT or a wait-list control group. The primary outcome was the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) on pain intensity (≥2 point reduction on an 11-point Numeric Rating Scale). Analyses were conducted from the health care system perspective and included data on health care utilization and pain medication retrieved from national registries for the period from baseline (T1) to 6 months postintervention (T4). Bootstrap simulations were used to estimate confidence intervals for the incremental cost and effect measures, and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. In sensitivity analyses, we replaced dropouts with last-observation-carried-forward and tested consequences of higher costs of the intervention. RESULTS: The intervention cost was 240€ per participant. The average total cost from T1 to T4 in the MBCT group was 1706€ compared with 2436€ in the control group (mean difference: 729€, P = .07). More women in the MBCT group (N:19/36; 52.8%) than in the control group (N:14/48; 29.2%) achieved an MCID in pain intensity (OR=2.71, P = .03). The MBCT was cost-effective with a probability of 85% with a value of an additional women achieving MCID set to zero remained cost-effective with a probability of 70% to 82% when smaller effect and higher MBCT costs were assumed. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that MBCT is a cost-effective pain intervention for women treated for breast cancer. Future studies could include utility measures, indirect costs, and active control groups to increase the generalizability and pragmatic value of the results.

Investigating the (cost-) effectiveness of attention bias modification (ABM) for outpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD): a randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Despite the range of available, evidence-based treatment options for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), the rather low response and remission rates suggest that treatment is not optimal, yet. Computerized attention bias modification (ABM) trainings may have the potential to be provided as cost-effective intervention as adjunct to usual care (UC), by speeding up recovery and bringing more patients into remission. Research suggests, that a selective attention for negative information contributes to development and maintenance of depression and that reducing this negative bias might be of therapeutic value. Previous ABM studies in depression, however, have been limited by small sample sizes, lack of long-term follow-up measures or focus on sub-clinical samples. This study aims at evaluating the long-term (cost-) effectiveness of internet-based ABM, as add-on treatment to UC in adult outpatients with MDD, in a specialized mental health care setting. METHODS/DESIGN: This study presents a double-blind randomized controlled trial in two parallel groups with follow-ups at 1, 6, and 12 months, combined with an economic evaluation. One hundred twenty six patients, diagnosed with MDD, who are registered for specialized outpatient services at a mental health care organization in the Netherlands, are randomized into either a positive training (towards positive and away from negative stimuli) or a sham training, as control condition (continuous attentional bias assessment). Patients complete eight training sessions (seven at home) during a period of two weeks (four weekly sessions). Primary outcome measures are change in attentional bias (pre- to post-test), mood response to stress (at post-test) and long-term effects on depressive symptoms (up to 1-year follow-up). Secondary outcome measures include rumination, resilience, positive and negative affect, and transfer to other cognitive measures (i.e., attentional bias for verbal stimuli, cognitive control, positive mental imagery), as well as quality of life and costs. DISCUSSION: This is the first study investigating the long-term effects of ABM in adult outpatients with MDD, alongside an economic evaluation. Next to exploring the mechanism underlying ABM effects, this study provides first insight into the effects of combining ABM and UC and the potential implementation of ABM in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trialregister.nl, NTR5285 . Registered 20 July 2015.

Cost-effectiveness of multidimensional family therapy compared to cognitive behavioral therapy for adolescents with a cannabis use disorder: Data from a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Multidimensional Family Therapy (MDFT) for adolescents with a cannabis use disorder, compared to Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT). METHODS: A parallel-group randomized controlled trial was performed. 109 adolescents with a DSM-IV cannabis use disorder (CBT n=54; MDFT n=55) were included. Assessments were conducted at baseline, and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months post-baseline, and included measures on cannabis and other substance use, delinquency, health care utilization, and general health related quality of life. RESULTS: Excluding those with missing cost-data, 96 participants (MDFT n=49; CBT n=47) were included. From a health care perspective, the average annual direct medical costs in the CBT group were €2015 (95%C.I. 1397-2714), compared to €5446 (95%C.I. 4159-7092) in the MDFT group. The average quality-adjusted life years (QALY's) gained were 0.06 QALY higher for the MDFT group, which led to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 54,308 Euro/QALY or €43,405 per recovered patient. Taking the costs of delinquency into account, the costs increased to €21,330 (95%C.I. 12,389-32,894) for the CBT group and to €21,915 (95%C.I. 16,273-28,181) for the MDFT group, which lead to an ICER of 9266 Euro/QALY or a cost per recovered patient of €7491. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first comprehensive CEA of MDFT compared to CBT and it demonstrated that when costs of delinquency were included, the ICERS were modest. The results underline the importance of adopting a broader perspective regarding cost effectiveness analyses in mental health care.

[Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for patients with somatoform disorders]. / Mindfulness-based cognitieve therapie voor patiënten met somatoforme stoornissen.

UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND The daily lives of patients with somatoform disorders are often severely impaired by the symptoms of their illness. Cognitive behavioural therapy has proved to be an effective treatment for somatoform disorders. However, patients with these disorders are often reluctant to consult a psychologist for their physical symptoms. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (mbct) might be a useful form of treatment because it gives explicit attention to physical experiences and because it has a strong focus on acceptance of symptoms. AIM: To measure the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of mbct for patients with somatoform disorders and to provide insight into how the therapy can gradually bring about behavioural change. METHOD: In this randomised controlled trial (rct), half of the participants (n=61) received mbct and the other half (n=56) received usual care. Participants belonged to the 10% of patients who visited primary care practitioners the most frequently; they had unexplained medical symptoms for at least six months. The primary outcomes were health status and mental and physical functioning. Measurements were taken at baseline, after 3 months and one year after baseline. In addition, records were kept of the costs involved so that we could obtain insight into health care use. Twelve patients were interviewed extensively at three points in time. RESULTS: Although the health status and the physical functioning were almost the same in the two conditions, the mental functioning improved in the patients who had attended mbct with an effect size of 0.3. At three months past baseline vitality and social functioning were significantly higher in the mindfulness condition than in the control condition. There was no significant difference between the total healthcare costs in the two conditions. The use of hospital care was lower in the mbct condition. At the same time, however, greater use was made of mental health care in the mbct condition. The interview study enabled us to establish a process of change. As a result of this process, patients focused less on short-term symptom reduction and more on the acceptance of their symptoms and on self-care. CONCLUSION: With the improvement that occurred in patients' mental functioning, we conclude that mbct is a meaningful therapy for patients with somatoform disorders. The fact that patients increased their use of mental health care after mbct could indicate that patients with somatoform disorders become more willing to receive mental health care.

The Cost of Inpatient Care of Schizophrenia and Treatment Schedules Used in German Academic Center: Kiel.

The authors aimed at analyzing the costs of inpatient care of schizophrenia in Kiel (Germany). The study was also to present treatment regimens used at the German Academic Center. Moreover, the study is a continuation and complement of the previous study conducted in Polish and Ukrainian Academic Center. Therefore, it helps increase the awareness and knowledge of residents concerning the cost of inpatient care of schizophrenia. The analysis was based on 105 hospital records of patients treated between January 2012 and June 2013. According to inclusion criteria, 50 adult patients (27 women and 23 men) were included in the study. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Medicine Faculty of CAU in Kiel. The cost of schizophrenia treatment of 50 patients in Kiel was EUR 604,280.90 ([Formula: see text] = EUR 12,085.62). The duration of hospital stay was on average [Formula: see text] = 51.02 days. The patients were treated with neuroleptics of all generations. The most popular atypical neuroleptic was amisulpride and the most popular typical neuroleptic was haloperidol. Patients from Kiel were provided a comprehensive non-pharmacological treatment. Treatment regiments and evaluations of costs of schizophrenia vary between countries. The costs of inpatient care of schizophrenia are high in Kiel. Treatment of schizophrenia seems to be comprehensive in Kiel and wide range of treatment opportunities contribute to a more effective treatment confirmed by less frequent relapses of schizophrenia than in Lviv (Ukraine), for example. Comprehensive treatment should be available everywhere, because it is a right of every patient.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy compared with maintenance antidepressant treatment in the prevention of depressive relapse/recurrence: results of a randomised controlled trial (the PREVENT study).

BACKGROUND: Individuals with a history of recurrent depression have a high risk of repeated depressive relapse/recurrence. Maintenance antidepressant medication (m-ADM) for at least 2 years is the current recommended treatment, but many individuals are interested in alternatives to m-ADM. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) has been shown to reduce the risk of relapse/recurrence compared with usual care but has not yet been compared with m-ADM in a definitive trial. OBJECTIVES: To establish whether MBCT with support to taper and/or discontinue antidepressant medication (MBCT-TS) is superior to and more cost-effective than an approach of m-ADM in a primary care setting for patients with a history of recurrent depression followed up over a 2-year period in terms of preventing depressive relapse/recurrence. Secondary aims examined MBCT's acceptability and mechanism of action. DESIGN: Single-blind, parallel, individual randomised controlled trial. SETTING: UK general practices. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with a diagnosis of recurrent depression and who were taking m-ADM. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to MBCT-TS or m-ADM with stratification by centre and symptomatic status. Outcome data were collected blind to treatment allocation and the primary analysis was based on the principle of intention to treat. Process studies using quantitative and qualitative methods examined MBCT's acceptability and mechanism of action. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was time to relapse/recurrence of depression. At each follow-up the following secondary outcomes were recorded: number of depression-free days, residual depressive symptoms, quality of life, health-related quality of life and psychiatric and medical comorbidities. RESULTS: In total, 212 patients were randomised to MBCT-TS and 212 to m-ADM. The primary analysis did not find any evidence that MBCT-TS was superior to m-ADM in terms of the primary outcome of time to depressive relapse/recurrence over 24 months [hazard ratio (HR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 1.18] or for any of the secondary outcomes. Cost-effectiveness analysis did not support the hypothesis that MBCT-TS is more cost-effective than m-ADM in terms of either relapse/recurrence or quality-adjusted life-years. In planned subgroup analyses, a significant interaction was found between treatment group and reported childhood abuse (HR 1.89, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.38), with delayed time to relapse/recurrence for MBCT-TS participants with a more abusive childhood compared with those with a less abusive history. Although changes in mindfulness were specific to MBCT (and not m-ADM), they did not predict outcome in terms of relapse/recurrence at 24 months. In terms of acceptability, the qualitative analyses suggest that many people have views about (dis)/continuing their ADM, which can serve as a facilitator or a barrier to taking part in a trial that requires either continuation for 2 years or discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: There is no support for the hypothesis that MBCT-TS is superior to m-ADM in preventing depressive relapse/recurrence among individuals at risk for depressive relapse/recurrence. Both treatments appear to confer protection against relapse/recurrence. There is an indication that MBCT may be most indicated for individuals at greatest risk of relapse/recurrence. It is important to characterise those most at risk and carefully establish if and why MBCT may be most indicated for this group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN26666654. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and the National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care South West Peninsula and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 73. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Mindfulness based cognitive therapy versus treatment as usual in adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

BACKGROUND: Adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often present with a lifelong pattern of core symptoms that is associated with impairments of functioning in daily life. This has a substantial personal and economic impact. In clinical practice there is a high need for additional or alternative interventions for existing treatments, usually consisting of pharmacotherapy and/or psycho-education. Although previous studies show preliminary evidence for the effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions in reducing ADHD symptoms and improving executive functioning, these studies have methodological limitations. This study will take account of these limitations and will examine the effectiveness of Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) in further detail. METHODS/DESIGN: A multi-centre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial will be conducted in N = 120 adults with ADHD. Patients will be randomised to MBCT in addition to treatment as usual (TAU) or TAU alone. Assessments will take place at baseline and at three, six and nine months after baseline. Primary outcome measure will be severity of ADHD symptoms rated by a blinded clinician. Secondary outcome measures will be self-reported ADHD symptoms, executive functioning, mindfulness skills, self-compassion, positive mental health and general functioning. In addition, a cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted. DISCUSSION: This trial will offer valuable information about the clinical and cost-effectiveness of MBCT in addition to TAU compared to TAU alone in adults swith ADHD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02463396. Registered 8 June 2015.