Cost-Effectiveness of Group Transdiagnostic Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Anxiety Disorders in Primary Care Settings: Economic Evaluation From the Healthcare System Perspective Over a 1-Year Time Horizon.

AIM: To assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of group transdiagnostic cognitive-behavioural therapy (tCBT) added to treatment as usual (TAU) for anxiety disorders compared to TAU only from the healthcare system perspective over a 1-year time horizon. METHODS: Data from a pragmatic multisite randomized controlled trial where adults (18-65 years) with an anxiety disorder were randomized to tCBT + TAU (n = 117) or TAU (n = 114). Group tCBT is a 12-week (2h weekly sessions) community-based intervention. Health service utilization and related costs were captured from medico-administrative data and included those for the intervention, ambulatory visits, hospitalizations and medications. Effectiveness was based on quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The study included measures at baseline, 4, 8, and 12 months. Intention-to-treat and complete case analyses were carried out. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation analyses. Seemingly unrelated regression analyses were used to assess the effect of the intervention on total costs and QALYs while also adjusting for baseline confounders. The probability of cost-effectiveness of the intervention was assessed according to different willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds using the net benefit regression method. RESULTS: The ICER of tCBT + TAU as compared to TAU in the intention-to-treat analysis was $6,581/QALY. Complete case analyses showed a similar ICER of $6,642/QALY. The probability at a WTP threshold of $20,000 and $40,000 that tCBT + TAU as compared to TAU is cost-effective is 93.0% and 99.9%. CONCLUSION: tCBT added to TAU appears to be cost-effective from the healthcare system perspective for treating adult patients with anxiety disorders. Larger trials including young and older adults as well as a range of anxiety disorders are needed to further investigate the cost-effectiveness of tCBT in different patient populations.

[Short-term interventions offered by les centres locaux de services communautaires (CLSC) to people living with anxiety or depressive disorders: Results of the longitudinal component of the Shared Knowledge study]. / Les interventions de courte durée offertes par les centres locaux de services communautaires (CLSC) aux personnes traversant un épisode de troubles anxieux ou dépressifs : une étude longitudinale au Québec.

Context In Quebec, adult mental health (AMH) first-line teams are mandated to provide psychosocial services to people living with mental health difficulties, including anxiety and mood disorders. Following the establishment of new clinical guidelines in 2017, the duration of interventions was not to exceed 15 sessions, with some exceptions. Objectives The overall aim of the longitudinal component of the Shared Knowledge study was to evaluate the care experience of individuals with an anxiety or depressive disorder receiving a short-term intervention (<15 sessions) by first-line AMH teams, and the evolution of recovery over time. Specifically, the objectives were to: 1) determine the appreciation of short-term interventions by service users; and 2) assess the evolution over time of the symptomatology, functioning and quality of life and recovery of individuals receiving short-term interventions. Method A mixed method longitudinal design was used. Telephone interviews were conducted with participants, in which the following variables were quantitatively and qualitatively assessed: appreciation of services received, quality of relationship with the provider (INSPIRE), depressive symptoms (PHQ-9), anxiety symptoms (GAD-7), global functioning (WHODAS), quality of life (ReQOL), and personal recovery (ERTAD). Linear mixed model analyses were performed to examine changes over time on quantitative measures. Content analysis was performed on the qualitative data. Results A total of 63 individuals participated in an interview before the start of their intervention and 22 of them participated after the end of this intervention. Statistical analyses showed a significant improvement in anxiety symptoms, quality of life, and personal recovery, but no difference was observed in depressive symptoms and level of functioning. Nearly half (47.4%) of participants reported that the intervention they received had "completely" met the need that had led them to seek help, and 33.3% felt "completely" equipped or empowered in their recovery. The quality of the relationship with the caregiver, the opportunity to take part in decision-making, and the personalization of the intervention according to their needs and preferences were some of the elements that were particularly appreciated. Conclusion Short-term interventions seem to be appreciated and produce positive effects in many people suffering from anxiety or depressive disorders. However, they remain insufficient for a number of them. A personal recovery measure should be used in conjunction with symptomatology and functioning scales to monitor the progress of people using first-line mental health services.